- From: Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 04:03:42 -0700
- To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
- Cc: draft-ietf-httpbis-proxy-status@ietf.org, httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, tpauly@apple.com, tpauly@apple.com, benno@NLnetLabs.nl
Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-httpbis-proxy-status-06: No Objection 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 https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-proxy-status/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you for the work put into this document. This header could indeed be very useful for debugging ! Please find below some non-blocking COMMENT points (but replies would be appreciated). Please also address Benno Overeinder's INTDR review at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/review-ietf-httpbis-proxy-status-06-intdir-telechat-overeinder-2021-08-24/ Special thanks to Tommy Pauly for his shepherd's write-up notably about the WG consensus. I hope that this helps to improve the document, Regards, -éric == COMMENTS == Is there any reason why a 'Proxy-Status-Request' (or similar) is not specified ? -- Section 2 -- About "Origin servers MUST NOT generate the Proxy-Status field.", while I understand the reasoning of it, I still wonder how a 'smart gateway' (not a plain HTTP proxy but more like a content changer, such as mobile optimization by reducing IMG size, or language translation, or ...) should handle this ? As it is new content, the 'smart gateway' is the origin but getting info from the real origin could also be useful. Or is it simply over-complex ? -- Section 2.1.2 -- Some explanations about the example would be welcome. -- Section 2.3 -- Should there be an error type for 'too many intermediaries' ?
Received on Wednesday, 25 August 2021 11:03:57 UTC