Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-httpbis-sfbis-06: (with COMMENT)

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-httpbis-sfbis-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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-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-sfbis/



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

Thank you to Stewart Bryant for the GENART review.

** Section 4.1.*.  Realizing that these definitions come from RFC8941:

-- Section 4.1.5.  What is the thinking behind the design to only support a
range of +/- “999,999,999,999,999”?  It’s much smaller than an int64.

-- Section 4.1.6.  What is the thinking behind the design to only support
“three significant digits to the right of the decimal point” and “12
significant digits to the left  of the decimal point”?  Should this be expanded
to at least be equivalent to decimal64

Received on Sunday, 12 May 2024 19:12:30 UTC