Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Updated registration procedure for the 256-9999 range (Addresses #28) #30

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Feb 7, 2025

Conversation

marco-tiloca-sics
Copy link
Contributor

@marco-tiloca-sics marco-tiloca-sics commented Jan 30, 2025

Fix #28

Copy link
Member

@thomas-fossati thomas-fossati left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, Marco!

LGTM

draft-ietf-core-cf-reg-update.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
draft-ietf-core-cf-reg-update.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
draft-ietf-core-cf-reg-update.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
draft-ietf-core-cf-reg-update.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
draft-ietf-core-cf-reg-update.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
draft-ietf-core-cf-reg-update.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@marco-tiloca-sics
Copy link
Contributor Author

marco-tiloca-sics commented Jan 30, 2025

The commit d9dd123 also attempts to simplify more, by defining a single set of Expert Review checks and not having a "lightweight" review.

The only intended addition to that remains the consideration on the limited codepoints for the 1-byte space of 0-255, which remains highlighted.

Copy link
Collaborator

@EskoDijk EskoDijk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for contributing!

@thomas-fossati
Copy link
Member

@cabo do you want to review this PR before we merge it?

@cabo
Copy link
Member

cabo commented Jan 30, 2025

Yes I think it's going the wrong way.

@thomas-fossati
Copy link
Member

thomas-fossati commented Jan 30, 2025

Yes I think it's going the wrong way.

ok! let's not merge it yet then.

4. If a Content Coding is specified, it must exist (or must have been approved for registration) in the "HTTP Content Coding" registry of the "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) Parameters" {{IANA.http-parameters}}.

For the 0-255 range, in addition to the checks described above, the DE is instructed to also evaluate the requested codepoint concerning the limited availability of the 1-byte codepoint space.
For the 256-9999 range and the 10000-64999 range, a similar criterion may also apply where combinations of media type parameters and content coding choices consume considerable code point space.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So, with this, I think this can go forward.

@thomas-fossati thomas-fossati merged commit 125a25c into main Feb 7, 2025
2 checks passed
@thomas-fossati thomas-fossati deleted the policies-256-9999 branch February 7, 2025 15:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Address "loophole" where DEs are not consulted in IETF stream
4 participants