[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-25

Meral Shirazipour <meral.shirazipour@ericsson.com> Tue, 03 December 2013 05:05 UTC

From: Meral Shirazipour <meral.shirazipour@ericsson.com>
To: "draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache.all@tools.ietf.org>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Gen-ART Last Call review draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-25
Thread-Index: Ac7v4tOeDR0bUaAxSM2WsldyLH9szQ==
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 05:05:37 +0000
Message-ID: <ABCAA4EF18F17B4FB619EA93DEF7939A32C879FC@eusaamb107.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_ABCAA4EF18F17B4FB619EA93DEF7939A32C879FCeusaamb107erics_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-25
Precedence: list

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq  .

Please resolve any Last Call comments you may receive.



Document: draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-25
Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour
Review Date: 2013-11-18/2013-12-02
IETF LC End Date: End of November (special deadline)
IESG Telechat date: 2013-12-19


Summary:
This draft is almost ready to be published as Proposed Standard but I have some comments.


Major issues:
none


Minor issues:
none


Nits/editorial comments:
Part 6 of:
draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging (82 pages)
draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics (98 pages)
draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional (27 pages)
draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range (24 pages)
*draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache (41 pages)
draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth (18 pages)
draft-ietf-httpbis-method-registrations (7 pages)
draft-ietf-httpbis-authscheme-registrations (5 pages)

-As mentioned in p4 review, was it considered merging p4 and p6?

-[Page 1], abstract, Suggestion to change the sentence to remove the word "requirements" to avoid confusion with a Requirements RFC (which is usually followed by the spec).
"This document defines requirements on HTTP caches... "

-[Page 12], last paragraph, suggestion to use SHOULD  or MUST

"heuristics can only be used on responses without explicit freshness"----->
"heuristics SHOULD/MUST only be used on responses without explicit freshness"

-[Page 19], "update the stored response a described below;"--typo-->"update the stored response as described below;

-[Page 22], does is matter if it is strong versus weak validation?
"
5.2.1.4.  no-cache

   The "no-cache" request directive indicates that a cache MUST NOT use
   a stored response to satisfy the request without successful
   validation on the origin server.
"
-[Page 34], Security section, as mentioned in my other reviews, would it be better to have a separate draft to discuss all security issues related to HTTP?



Best Regards,
Meral

---
Meral Shirazipour
Ericsson Research
www.ericsson.com

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review draft-ietf-htt… Meral Shirazipour
Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review draft-ietf… Mark Nottingham
Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review draft-ietf… Meral Shirazipour
Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review draft-ietf… Jari Arkko