- From: Gunter Van de Velde via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
- Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:16:22 -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, mnot@mnot.net
Gunter Van de Velde 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: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # Gunter Van de Velde, RTG AD, comments for draft-ietf-httpbis-zstd-window-size-02 ## Many thanks for writing this document. It was a short to the point document and i have no objections to see this moving forward. ## It does seem a bit unusual that Section 3 of the document uses BCP14 normative language, especially since this is an informational document. I understand the intention is to clearly outline the boundaries, but because the document is informational, it doesn’t carry the same normative weight. This could allow implementers the flexibility to overlook the suggested boundaries if they choose to do so.
Received on Thursday, 22 August 2024 07:16:31 UTC