Welcome to the crowd, folks -- here's another PEP draft that may actually make
it to experimental RFC status soon:
"PEP - an Extension Mechanism for HTTP"
And yes,one can say there is PEPTCP as much as there is TCPPEP...
ObWG comment: Per the Los Angeles consensus, I agree that there is value in
putting the PEP design into the RFC library as a sign of its maturity review,
and potential citation in future woprk. However, iut is clearly not standards
track anymore, but nor should it go all the way to informational; there is a
case to be made that Eric and Henrik's code and a wide variety of other
"end-user" applications at W3C justify the Experimental banner. The main
result of these experiences is "negotiation is hard -- so don't". Rather than
complex transfer of intent or policy, the new Mandatory- scheme just says what
to do; the PEP RFC should stand as a warning that "here lie dragons".
PS. Thanks to Lloyd Wood for pointing out this BOF report.