- From: Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:53:12 -0700
- To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
- Cc: draft-ietf-httpbis-zstd-window-size@ietf.org, httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, mnot@mnot.net
Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-httpbis-zstd-window-size-02: 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-zstd-window-size/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- We're updating the content encoding "zstd" to be defined explicitly as: > Description: A stream of bytes compressed using the Zstandard protocol with a Window_Size of not more than 8 MB. I'm a little worried about interoperability here. We're establishing a constraint on the use of that content encoding keyword where there wasn't one before, without some kind of signaling to any current use cases. If I'm successfully currently streaming using a Window_Size of 9 MB, and using this content encoding, what should happen once this is published?
Received on Thursday, 22 August 2024 05:53:17 UTC