Re: SOAP IANA considerations

I had a quick chat about it a while back with Patrik (Pittsburgh,
IIRC); he encouraged the attempt. 

That's not to say that it'll be easy, of course. If the WG needs this
registration in a timely fashion, I wouldn't tie it to the
establishment of a registry; that can be done separately.

I believe HTTP headers are considered completely separate from MIME
headers, and the headers that are MIMEish or derived from MIME are
well-defined in 2616.


On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 05:11:39PM +0000, Graham Klyne wrote:
> At 10:58 AM 12/6/01 -0500, Mark Baker wrote:
> >We have identified three items requiring registration with IANA;
> >
> >- SOAP media type
> >- SOAPAction header (*)
> >- SOAPAction-negotiation HTTP response code
> >
> >(*) there is currently no HTTP header registry at IANA, but we can 
> >establish one
> 
> Has this been discussed with anyone in the IETF, such as the applications 
> area directors?
> 
> I ask because it's not clear to me that creating the header
> registry would necessarily be a trivial exercise.  Given that HTTP
> shares some headers with MIME, should the HTTP registry be
> completely separate fro MIME (and other email-related) headers? 
> Similar thoughts arise with respect to news-related headers (again,
> because MIME is the linking theme).
> 
> If it helps, I currently have a proposal on the table at
> http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-klyne-msghdr-registry-00.txt,
> whose primary goal is to provide a place for email-related headers. 
> This has had some discussion on the IETF general applications /
> rfc822 mailing lists, a couple of months ago.
> 
> #g
> 
> 
> ------------
> Graham Klyne
> GK@NineByNine.org
> 

-- 
Mark Nottingham
http://www.mnot.net/

Received on Thursday, 6 December 2001 15:01:27 UTC