From nobody Mon Feb 4 19:45:15 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-message-headers@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-message-headers@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEEF5130FC7 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 19:45:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=seP46v6e; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=NotTtgm5 Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mdFIIih6lZco for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 19:45:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 809B3129A87 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 19:45:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7293B22120; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 22:45:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 04 Feb 2019 22:45:09 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm1; bh=6 fkOELy5TSmCQwAN90RGzf8Bi18zEDMa/trALp7NT1c=; b=seP46v6emd67k2kVV CB8FjDbGW54yGS/dsfC19R5zg7xY4D4CJqqfwksfMMDlY8zM1NJkl5yNk6S3M6bX ybfmyxQD3q861lSsVKuV0eiDJwJMWWPRAK4uHdndrz9PD88C04E2NpxP1F/IDRv4 Ix7wNV9fVLQmpG8zv8ZYGTrAK9ZJIFo3+/t6ibJRgjLgLYQNSgDC4P9U1WyqfpiN +P4H0UAMcjrvh+Ytr89jlg25qQtCbIf7wP6uC872D8Y/uD8OPc6+EWrviIWrT5B1 +Gp1hJlUMIex20BiXQCsqBMbjWe+5aN9e+bnY1MH3TWSzVxI1hdm6PmwG21+/6aZ 5luzA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=6fkOELy5TSmCQwAN90RGzf8Bi18zEDMa/trALp7NT 1c=; b=NotTtgm5kfzczEsyXGYunvg7tsxL3bde5XoZoxvkcIPYn4RTKEqUPhQEJ 1hFuqqnsberLvm4OkUD7bcwpasRawin0IbGaVdxYKxkoGHgcrvbXQ7ML6xIBIRyL wgKQDT+g+zcTUPmZB85FFFpVHh8e3ejnNk3IFLywel/IeSbu/faRyyU8q7rvcgDZ E/XyUuVPiJWu578GmBzNI7mDzTpz8InVSyQHgwV2FIrplSbPiIGuqqxHLjYpCKz0 e+KJ0cAqyFiK3HqzYULKxTO7QMMhaFrPXFL53erfdS9fSY1L6fQhKJiDb4vQegtT dalI3+2R9sQEtgh93r9CC1YUydh+A== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedtledrkeehgdeigecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfhuthenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedt tdenucenucfjughrpegtggfuhfgjfffgkfhfvffosehtqhhmtdhhtddvnecuhfhrohhmpe forghrkhcupfhothhtihhnghhhrghmuceomhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvtheqnecuffho mhgrihhnpehhthhtphhsthgrthhushhprhhovhhishhiohhnrghlrghuthhhohhruggvvh hinhhmuhhllhhinhhsthifihhfkhgrkhhgohhoghhlvgdrtghomhdpfiefrdhorhhgpdgr mhhpphhrohhjvggtthdrohhrghdpghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmpdhivghtfhdrohhrghdpmh hnohhtrdhnvghtnecukfhppedugeegrddufeeirddujeehrddvkeenucfrrghrrghmpehm rghilhhfrhhomhepmhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpe dt X-ME-Proxy: Received: from attitudadjuster.mnot.net (unknown [144.136.175.28]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id A1002E44A8; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 22:45:06 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.2 \(3445.102.3\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 14:45:02 +1100 Cc: ietf-message-headers@lists.ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: Devin Mullins X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.102.3) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-message-headers] Requesting provisional registration for AMP-Cache-Transform header X-BeenThere: ietf-message-headers@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion list for header fields used in Internet messaging applications." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 03:45:13 -0000 Hi Devin, Sorry for the delay; I saw this a while ago but didn't look into it = deeply. For future reference, you're much more likely to get reviews if = you send this to the HTTP WG mailing list (we're in the process of = separating HTTP headers out into their own registry, in part to make = that more clear). Without commenting on the entire document you link to, it says: > Therefore, the need arises for the origin to distinguish requests from = users and requests from SXG intermediaries. That is, there is a = difference between "I can understand the SXG format" and "I prefer an = SXG if available". Accept: application/signed-exchange indicates the = former. No currently-defined header indicates the latter. However, Accept *can* express that; e.g., Accept: application/signed-exchange;q=3D1.0, */*;q=3D0.05 Did you consider using qvalues in the accept header to achieve this? Cheers, P.S. It may be good to follow up on ietf-http-wg@w3.org, and then report = the result back here. I haven't CC:ed them to avoid cross-posting. > On 7 Sep 2018, at 10:33 am, Devin Mullins = wrote: >=20 > Header field name: AMP-Cache-Transform > Applicable protocol: http > Status: provisional > Author: Devin Mullins ; Google; = https://www.ampproject.org/ > Specification: = https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/blob/master/spec/amp-cache-transform= .md >=20 > Let me know what other information I can provide. >=20 > Thanks! > Devin > _______________________________________________ > Ietf-message-headers mailing list > Ietf-message-headers@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-message-headers -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Fri Feb 22 19:11:28 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-message-headers@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-message-headers@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66908130EB3 for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 19:11:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -17.5 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id e_D7w1_u2549 for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 19:11:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ot1-x335.google.com (mail-ot1-x335.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::335]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9FDC126F72 for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 19:11:23 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ot1-x335.google.com with SMTP id t7so3600950otk.8 for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 19:11:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=FqiOSXHuiatSX6Quxt2Rv9salyyniXZvGb+z3uMc0II=; b=U2X1mKsDNYCOSyCm+hMvZ63/Zm2SujthDRXAYNSek0vzliywvrqBZYWc24AF669UE5 ezWDN6BW7hLRCu44W3zG/74Zo4UrFE4OflAZy9RRQ3vvDaaixgi+NEdTEdgP17GQSYN9 bjCqgpLFicY1PiifVF/hLy2Ime39kyvti3GoT0WvotPE4nR6Wvxg+fXtSEZMAhJ4eXGw xEs9PiE6ux2ieAgSiAupwJG45S13RR33nSGwIpKwguMpHX+6VTCMN93fUqvEEiQibpIz q3gtr+pJpjFGYpVZ7HA93KPfnxZR+x4yEtBz8oOgAPYir32/YFGb+Q6ceAi3tZXmL7fQ 7o7w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=FqiOSXHuiatSX6Quxt2Rv9salyyniXZvGb+z3uMc0II=; b=RWaXKNtNKiNif5EutBy1IZwwHaopQVCapSpMmMQZXgmX05obTVrKtbq5O6QHzxlZCu 1WbCLK2ERKJNEfDVpT/jce+Ml8ZQeOrNAgjOcZgw3LdOAaZXR6tpFeSW08NcD78FYZEi hs+fd3ewtmjcTAtT+y+ewiSWJ5Jw+Nc1UD32rxnMFe5w+gaGcLjKDC5tYnanAPap9WuX ui/OMvn4C6E8vJEJww+2UTiifRd7nKmvwQJynrEQ3fh8sNJH12v/+xFcGWhujxFa2Tjs HGYgb6mGVZV+74S614GGaXPNbnnkhmI7RJIfAP1T62/ysiLJcWRorUfj4XMp8rE3V9Ld QSsA== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuYLQ227rhjTreRpQevR+idWemzt/QFF9cEgCtU+39bdbAXtfccf bokVTRYa6GL2yrSawq5kjFdWg8mASY8VJMOP7DAHvzI8Gp8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IYaghKcNRCzyP2Vnwe7vORnR3sBLDW2WJ9fGJ3r6mijjmr1ucT3H3zLfcq0Hz3Xq+BDJBQVuQCMYR9KFH+tpZ0= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:1241:: with SMTP id s1mr4823408otp.24.1550891482442; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 19:11:22 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Devin Mullins Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 19:10:55 -0800 Message-ID: To: Mark Nottingham Cc: ietf-message-headers@lists.ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e5e58f0582870f02" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ietf-message-headers] Requesting provisional registration for AMP-Cache-Transform header X-BeenThere: ietf-message-headers@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion list for header fields used in Internet messaging applications." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2019 03:11:26 -0000 --000000000000e5e58f0582870f02 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi Mark, thanks for the reply. Just a short FYI, I replied with details to ietf-http-wg last week. It is pending moderator approval; I contacted the moderator & will let this list know the results of that discussion once it's happened. On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 7:45 PM Mark Nottingham wrote: > Hi Devin, > > Sorry for the delay; I saw this a while ago but didn't look into it > deeply. For future reference, you're much more likely to get reviews if you > send this to the HTTP WG mailing list (we're in the process of separating > HTTP headers out into their own registry, in part to make that more clear). > > Without commenting on the entire document you link to, it says: > > > Therefore, the need arises for the origin to distinguish requests from > users and requests from SXG intermediaries. That is, there is a difference > between "I can understand the SXG format" and "I prefer an SXG if > available". Accept: application/signed-exchange indicates the former. No > currently-defined header indicates the latter. > > However, Accept *can* express that; e.g., > > Accept: application/signed-exchange;q=1.0, */*;q=0.05 > > Did you consider using qvalues in the accept header to achieve this? > > Cheers, > > P.S. It may be good to follow up on ietf-http-wg@w3.org, and then report > the result back here. I haven't CC:ed them to avoid cross-posting. > > > > > On 7 Sep 2018, at 10:33 am, Devin Mullins 40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > > > > Header field name: AMP-Cache-Transform > > Applicable protocol: http > > Status: provisional > > Author: Devin Mullins ; Google; > https://www.ampproject.org/ > > Specification: > https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/blob/master/spec/amp-cache-transform..md > > > > Let me know what other information I can provide. > > > > Thanks! > > Devin > > _______________________________________________ > > Ietf-message-headers mailing list > > Ietf-message-headers@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-message-headers > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > > --000000000000e5e58f0582870f02 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Mark, thanks for the reply. Just a short FYI, I replied= with details to ietf-http-wg last week. It is pending moderator approval; = I contacted the moderator & will let this list know the results of that= discussion once it's happened.

On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 7:45 PM Mark Nott= ingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
Hi Devin,

Sorry for the delay; I saw this a while ago but didn't look into it dee= ply. For future reference, you're much more likely to get reviews if yo= u send this to the HTTP WG mailing list (we're in the process of separa= ting HTTP headers out into their own registry, in part to make that more cl= ear).

Without commenting on the entire document you link to, it says:

> Therefore, the need arises for the origin to distinguish requests from= users and requests from SXG intermediaries. That is, there is a difference= between "I can understand the SXG format" and "I prefer an = SXG if available". Accept: application/signed-exchange indicates the f= ormer. No currently-defined header indicates the latter.

However, Accept *can* express that; e.g.,

Accept: application/signed-exchange;q=3D1.0, */*;q=3D0.05

Did you consider using qvalues in the accept header to achieve this?

Cheers,

P.S. It may be good to follow up on ietf-http-wg@w3.org, and then report the result back = here. I haven't CC:ed them to avoid cross-posting.



> On 7 Sep 2018, at 10:33 am, Devin Mullins <twifkak=3D40google.com@dmarc.ietf.= org> wrote:
>
> Header field name: AMP-Cache-Transform
> Applicable protocol: http
> Status: provisional
> Author: Devin Mullins <twifkak@google.com>; Google; https://www.ampproject.or= g/
> Specification: ht= tps://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/blob/master/spec/amp-cache-transform..m= d
>
> Let me know what other information I can provide.
>
> Thanks!
> Devin
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-message-headers mailing list
> Iet= f-message-headers@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo= /ietf-message-headers

--
Mark Nottingham=C2=A0 =C2=A0https://www.mnot.net/

--000000000000e5e58f0582870f02--