- From: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 22:38:02 -0800
- To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
- Cc: mnot@mnot.net, draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression.all@tools.ietf.org, httpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Richard Barnes has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-10: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Section 2.3.3: "Indices between 1 and the length of the static table..." The use of 1-based indexing here seems likely to lead to incompatibilities. Section 3: Currently, you never say explicitly that a header block is the concatenation of encoded header fields, where each field is encoded according to Section 6. This would be a good spot to do that. Section 5.1: "... always finishes at the end of an octet" It was not immediately clear to me that the "?" bits indicated that an integer need not *begin* at an octet boundary. It would be helpful to note that here.
Received on Thursday, 22 January 2015 06:38:31 UTC