- From: Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
- Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2026 02:22:38 -0800
- To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
- Cc: draft-ietf-httpbis-incremental@ietf.org, httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, mnot@mnot.net
Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-httpbis-incremental-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/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-incremental/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # Éric Vyncke INT AD comments for draft-ietf-httpbis-incremental-03 CC @evyncke Thank you for the work put into this document. Please find below some non-blocking COMMENT points/nits. I hope that this review helps to improve the document, Regards, -éric Note: this ballot comments follow the Markdown syntax of https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/tree/main, i.e., they can be processed by a tool to create github issues. ## COMMENTS (non-blocking) ### Section 3 Per https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-statement-on-clarifying-the-use-of-bcp-14-key-words/, the SHOULD cannot appear alone. Two uses in this section: `HTTP intermediaries SHOULD NOT buffer the entire message before forwarding it` SHOULD rather than a MUST is probably to cope with 'legacy' intermediaries, if so, then suggest using a sentence such as 'HTTP intermediaries implementing this specification MUST NOT...' Later `SHOULD use the presence of the Incremental header field` is either in the same case as above, else it should be clear when an intermediary can deviate from the SHOULD. ### Section 4.1 Same comment about the SHOULD in ` the intermediary SHOULD respond with a 501 (Not Implemented) error``
Received on Tuesday, 3 February 2026 10:22:42 UTC