Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

HTTP-31: Other Schemes and downref to experimental #4209

Closed
gloinul opened this issue Oct 14, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #4223
Closed

HTTP-31: Other Schemes and downref to experimental #4209

gloinul opened this issue Oct 14, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #4223
Labels
-http editorial An issue that does not affect the design of the protocol; does not require consensus. ietf-lc An issue that was raised during IETF Last Call.

Comments

@gloinul
Copy link
Contributor

gloinul commented Oct 14, 2020

Section 3.2.2 states:

"Prior to making requests for an origin whose scheme is not "https", the client MUST ensure the server is willing to serve that scheme. If the client intends to make requests for an origin whose scheme is "http", this means that it MUST obtain a valid http-opportunistic response for the origin as described in [RFC8164] prior to making any such requests. Other schemes might define other mechanisms."

The first issue is that this text make normative use of RFC8164 to handle "http" scheme. RFC8164 is an experimental RFC. Thus we have a downref issue. I think it would be inappropriate to elevate RFC8164 status by allowing a downref here. I think one option would be to move the specification of the usage of RFC 8164 for the "http" URI scheme in HTTP/3 into its own experimental RFC. Another potential option is to simply inform about the ongoing experiment without specifying that it can be done with HTTP/3.

Secondly, I am uncertain about the scope of the first sentence in that paragraph. Is there any other URI schemes other than "http" that this is applicable for? If it is which type of URI schemes is it applicable for? For clearly it is not applicable to the "rtsp" scheme that isn't using HTTP at all.

@larseggert larseggert added -http ietf-lc An issue that was raised during IETF Last Call. labels Oct 14, 2020
@larseggert larseggert added this to Triage in Late Stage Processing via automation Oct 14, 2020
@MikeBishop
Copy link
Contributor

MikeBishop commented Oct 14, 2020

Second point first: HTTP doesn't restrict the scheme of URIs a client can request; URI schemes define what protocols can be used to access them, which might or might not include HTTP.

For example, RFC7540 says:

   ":scheme" is not restricted to "http" and "https" schemed URIs.  A
  proxy or gateway can translate requests for non-HTTP schemes,
  enabling the use of HTTP to interact with non-HTTP services.

To the first point, I feel like not mentioning that RFC8164 can be done with HTTP/3 means it's irrelevant to include in this document, and the requirement to verify the peer can serve a scheme is necessary.

Perhaps something like:

Prior to making requests for an origin whose scheme is not "https", the client MUST ensure the server is willing to serve that scheme. For origins whose scheme is "http", an experimental method to accomplish this is described in [RFC8164]. Other mechanisms might be defined in the future.

@gloinul
Copy link
Contributor Author

gloinul commented Oct 15, 2020

The proposed text looks good. I think that resolves it and you can move RFC8164 to be a informational ref.

So I think this resolves my issue.

@larseggert
Copy link
Member

Based on this resolution, labeling this as "editorial"

@larseggert larseggert added the editorial An issue that does not affect the design of the protocol; does not require consensus. label Oct 15, 2020
@project-bot project-bot bot moved this from Triage to Editorial Issues in Late Stage Processing Oct 15, 2020
Late Stage Processing automation moved this from Editorial Issues to Issue Handled Oct 15, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
-http editorial An issue that does not affect the design of the protocol; does not require consensus. ietf-lc An issue that was raised during IETF Last Call.
Projects
Late Stage Processing
  
Issue Handled
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants