- From: Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
- Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 03:48:21 -0800
- To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
- Cc: draft-ietf-httpbis-priority@ietf.org, httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, tpauly@apple.com, tpauly@apple.com
Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-httpbis-priority-11: 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/blog/handling-iesg-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-priority/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you for the work put into this document. It is really easy to read and it should bring real values. Please find below some non-blocking COMMENT points (but replies would be appreciated even if only for my own education). Special thanks to Tommy Pauly for the shepherd's write-up including the section about the WG consensus. I hope that this helps to improve the document, Regards, -éric I like the way that urgency and incremental are defined and used. -- Section 4.1 -- Please bear with my lack of knowledge here, but I wonder what is the expected client behaviour in the absence of SETTINGS_NO_RFC7540_PRIORITIES ? Should it keep using the 2 priority signals ? I also wonder about the asymmetry between the 2nd and 3rd paragraph, i.e., may the client continue to send both priority signales in the 2nd paragraph ? -- Section 4.3 -- Should the 'community' be defined in "cannot be agreed upon in the community" ? -- Section 6 -- Does the describe used of u=7 contradict the one described earlier as "delivery of software updates" in section 4.1 ? Perhaps add the pre-fetch use case in section 4.1 ? -- Section 7.1 -- Should this be "Type (i) = 0x10" in the figure 1 to match the text "(type=0x10)" in the first paragraph ?
Received on Wednesday, 15 December 2021 11:48:36 UTC