Re: HTTP Transport? (was: Re: Security Design Team)

[Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com>]

--On tisdag 3 april 2001 21.35 -0400 Richard Shockey 
<rshockey@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> For the last time ...this list really needs understand that we will never
> be permitted to use HTTP OK ..get it ..the IESG has made its statements
> on  this quite clear.  Out of bounds out of scope...see IPP for further
> information.

IFF this wg want to use the HTTP syntax and protocol (which is not easy, 
just read HTTP/1.1 and see that you understand binary transport and 
chunking) and not something else, it is the case that the protocol have to 
be on a separate port number (not 80), and the wg further have to explain 
why the HTTP transport protocol is a more efficient transport mechanism 
than other transport mechanisms available.

Note that I didn't write anything about "ability to pass firewall" or 
"already implemented".

We develop a protocol which go between two endpoints, and not an API which 
you are to use.

And, yes, as Richard says, the IESG is very nervous about reuse of 
protocols without a detailed description of issues like congestion (yes, if 
you reuse one protocol for a different use than what was intended, you get 
completely different characteristics on the IP layer) and routing (routing 
is something which should be handled on the lower layers, while application 
layer is point to point).

That said, HTTP is reused in some protocols, like IPP, so I am not saying 
that HTTP is not reusable.

Handwaving is though not enough as an argument.

   Patrik