-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26
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
RFC 9205 alignment #671
Comments
tgeoghegan
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 20, 2025
In anticipation of some more nuanced changes that are coming for #669, \#670 and #671, this commit contains various editorial changes I've been accumulating while doing passes on the document. The goals are _brevity_ and _clarity_. I've tagged changes roughly line by line with a justification. Happy reviewing!
tgeoghegan
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 20, 2025
In anticipation of some more nuanced changes that are coming for #669, \#670 and #671, this commit contains various editorial changes I've been accumulating while doing passes on the document. The goals are _brevity_ and _clarity_. I've tagged changes roughly line by line with a justification. Happy reviewing!
tgeoghegan
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 20, 2025
Edits to the sections on message transport, HPKE config request and upload request to align with RFC 9205. - provide examples of requests and responses - use broadest possible status codes - refer to RFC 9110 for HTTPS cert validation Part of #671
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
At the most recent PPM interim, I discussed doing a pass on the document to align with RFC 9205/BCP 56. The most substantial change there is #669, but there's also smaller changes like how we discuss HTTP status codes or use of HTTPS, and I want to track and make those changes separately.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: