Media Type Registration for Protocol Buffers
draft-ietf-dispatch-mime-protobuf-07

Yes

Erik Kline
Orie Steele

No Objection

Andy Newton
Deb Cooley
Éric Vyncke
Gorry Fairhurst
Gunter Van de Velde
Jim Guichard
Mahesh Jethanandani
Mike Bishop
Mohamed Boucadair
Paul Wouters
Roman Danyliw

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 04 and is now closed.

Erik Kline
Yes
Orie Steele
Yes
Andy Newton
No Objection
Comment (2025-11-18 for -04) Not sent 
Thanks to Darrel Miller for the ARTART review.
Deb Cooley
No Objection
Éric Vyncke
No Objection
Gorry Fairhurst
No Objection
Comment (2025-11-16 for -04) Not sent 
I have read this document and saw no transport concerns.

Best wishes,
Gorry
Gunter Van de Velde
No Objection
Comment (2025-11-14 for -04) Not sent 
No comments from Routing perspective
Jim Guichard
No Objection
Mahesh Jethanandani
No Objection
Mike Bishop
No Objection
Comment (2025-11-19 for -05) Sent 
Totally reasonable.

I did find a slight dissonance between saying "multiple wire formats" and "only the [Binary] and [ProtoJSON] formats"; while both are technically accurate, one phrasing suggests a large number and the other suggests a small one. I would probably change the first to "two wire formats" and omit "only" from the second one.

It might be worth a word about the `encoding` parameter in combination with the media types, which already specify the encoding. Are these intended to allow for versioning / extensions should there ever be an *alternative* binary encoding or an *alternative* JSON encoding? Is there a reason these wouldn't simply be their own new media types?
Mohamed Boucadair
No Objection
Paul Wouters
No Objection
Roman Danyliw
No Objection
Comment (2025-11-16 for -04) Not sent 
Thank you to Stewart Bryant for the GENART review.