Skip to main content

Prefer Header for HTTP
draft-snell-http-prefer-18

Yes

(Barry Leiba)

No Objection

(Adrian Farrel)
(Benoît Claise)
(Brian Haberman)
(Gonzalo Camarillo)
(Martin Stiemerling)
(Pete Resnick)
(Ralph Droms)
(Ron Bonica)
(Russ Housley)
(Sean Turner)
(Stewart Bryant)
(Wesley Eddy)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 15 and is now closed.

(Barry Leiba; former steering group member) Yes

Yes (for -15)

                            

(Adrian Farrel; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -15)

                            

(Benoît Claise; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -16)

                            

(Brian Haberman; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -15)

                            

(Gonzalo Camarillo; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -16)

                            

(Martin Stiemerling; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -15)

                            

(Pete Resnick; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection (for -16)

                            

(Ralph Droms; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -15)

                            

(Robert Sparks; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2012-10-23 for -15)
Given that the document points to the similarity between Prefer and Expect, consider being explicit about not using tokens defined for Prefer in Expect header fields and vice-versa. You might also provide guidance about whether to use the same token in both if you are defining a behavior that would make sense to use in both places.

Did you consider whether a client would ever need to say "I prefer thing X most, Y if you won't do that, and Z if you wont't do that"? Does anything here prevent adding something later that would capture that semantic? (I don't think so, parameters could be added to group preferences and give them weights for instance).

Why isn't the SHOULD in "The Prefer header field is end-to-end and SHOULD be forwarded unless" not a MUST?

Do you want to say anything about the order of parameters on a given header field value being significant or not? (Do you inherit a not from the base spec?)

(Ron Bonica; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -15)

                            

(Russ Housley; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -15)

                            

(Sean Turner; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -16)

                            

(Stephen Farrell; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2012-10-24 for -16)
-16 addressed my other comments, (thanks), not sure if these
were missed or not but don't think I saw any response

- Is "relation types" correct in section 4, 1st para?

- 4.3, where is delta-seconds defined?

(Stewart Bryant; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -15)

                            

(Wesley Eddy; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -16)