Section 2.7.1 of draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-18

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Section 2.7.1 of draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-18

sm-7
Hello,

 From what I understand, the updated version of Section 3.2.2 in RFC
2616 is currently Section 2.7.1 of
draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-18.  From RFC 2616:

   "The use of IP addresses in URLs SHOULD be avoided whenever
    possible (see RFC 1900 [24])."

And in draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-18:

   "If the host identifier is provided as an IP literal or IPv4 address,
    then the origin server is any listener on the indicated TCP port at
    that IP address."

Was the requirement to avoid IP addresses dropped?

Regards,
-sm

P.S. I am not raising this as an issue.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Section 2.7.1 of draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-18

Roy T. Fielding
On Jan 8, 2012, at 11:56 PM, SM wrote:

> Hello,
>
> From what I understand, the updated version of Section 3.2.2 in RFC 2616 is currently Section 2.7.1 of draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-18.  From RFC 2616:
>
>  "The use of IP addresses in URLs SHOULD be avoided whenever
>   possible (see RFC 1900 [24])."
>
> And in draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-18:
>
>  "If the host identifier is provided as an IP literal or IPv4 address,
>   then the origin server is any listener on the indicated TCP port at
>   that IP address."
>
> Was the requirement to avoid IP addresses dropped?

Yes, I believe that was intentional because that advice had nothing
to do with HTTP (and is not a real requirement anyway).

....Roy


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Section 2.7.1 of draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-18

Poul-Henning Kamp
In reply to this post by sm-7
In message <[hidden email]>, SM writes:

> From what I understand, the updated version of Section 3.2.2 in RFC
>2616 is currently Section 2.7.1 of
>draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-18.  From RFC 2616:
>
>   "The use of IP addresses in URLs SHOULD be avoided whenever
>    possible (see RFC 1900 [24])."
>
>And in draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-18:
>
>   "If the host identifier is provided as an IP literal or IPv4 address,
>    then the origin server is any listener on the indicated TCP port at
>    that IP address."
>
>Was the requirement to avoid IP addresses dropped?

Isn't this simply pointing out that there usually are multiple domains
served by a single HTTP server ?

--
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[hidden email]         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Section 2.7.1 of draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-18

sm-7
At 00:57 09-01-2012, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>Isn't this simply pointing out that there usually are multiple domains
>served by a single HTTP server ?

Yes.

Roy answered my question (
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2012JanMar/0034.html 
).  It was more about IPv6 than HTTP.  IPv4 addresses are sometimes
used in application protocols.  That can be a problem for IPv6
deployment as the "fix" entails a change in DNS and where the URI is used.

Regards,
-sm