The ORIGIN Extension in HTTP/3
draft-ietf-httpbis-origin-h3-03
Yes
Paul Wouters
(Francesca Palombini)
(Zaheduzzaman Sarker)
No Objection
(Alvaro Retana)
(John Scudder)
(Lars Eggert)
(Martin Duke)
(Robert Wilton)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 03 and is now closed.
Paul Wouters
Yes
Erik Kline
No Objection
Comment
(2023-02-11)
Sent
# Internet AD comments for draft-ietf-httpbis-origin-h3-03 CC @ekline ## Comments ### S1 * Is 9114 A.2.3 really where the required updates are discussed? Maybe it's just much more subtle than I would have expected. ### S2 * Can an ORIGIN frame be sent from a child to the server on its control stream? If not, what kind of error is it?
Roman Danyliw
No Objection
Comment
(2023-02-14)
Not sent
Thank you to Rifaat Shekh-Yusef for the SECDIR review.
Éric Vyncke
No Objection
Comment
(2023-02-14)
Sent
Thanks for the work done in this short document. I am just wondering what is the difference between an ORIGIN Frame without any Origin-Entry and one ORIGIN Frame with only empty Origin-Entry (i.e., without any ASCII-Origin)... Perhaps due to my relative ignorance of HTTP. -éric
Francesca Palombini Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Zaheduzzaman Sarker Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Not sent
Alvaro Retana Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Not sent
John Scudder Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Not sent
Lars Eggert Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Not sent
Martin Duke Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Not sent
Murray Kucherawy Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2023-02-15)
Sent
The shepherd writeup doesn't say why Proposed Standard is the right status here. It's fairly obvious, but it would be great to have a complete answer on the record. I suggest changing "OPTIONAL" to "optional" and dropping the use of RFC 2119/8174, which isn't really necessary for this simple document.
Robert Wilton Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Not sent