W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2022

Zaheduzzaman Sarker's No Objection on draft-ietf-httpbis-targeted-cache-control-03: (with COMMENT)

From: Zaheduzzaman Sarker via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2022 00:21:58 -0800
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-httpbis-targeted-cache-control@ietf.org, httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, tpauly@apple.com, tpauly@apple.com
Message-ID: <164249411871.13694.17268136369930839916@ietfa.amsl.com>
Zaheduzzaman Sarker has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-httpbis-targeted-cache-control-03: 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-targeted-cache-control/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for working on this specification.

I have only one observation - CND-Cache-Control is a targeted for CDN caches,
however, my understanding is this can end up in the clients. There is no
description or reference to description about what a client supposed to handle
this (obvious is to ignore). It would be great if we can write something about
it or refer to the client behavior description elsewhere. If my understanding
is wrong that this header field will never reach any client then I would say it
requires some wording in the specification to clearly state that.
Received on Tuesday, 18 January 2022 08:22:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 18 January 2022 08:22:14 UTC