Merged
Conversation
toddbaert
force-pushed
the
feat/client-extensions
branch
from
6e7324a to
3c1e6bc
Compare
toddbaert
commented
Jan 10, 2023
skyerus
reviewed
Jan 11, 2023
beeme1mr
reviewed
Jan 11, 2023
toddbaert
requested review from
AloisReitbauer,
InTheCloudDan,
agentgonzo,
benjiro,
dabeeeenster,
davejohnston,
jakedoublev,
josecolella,
justinabrahms,
kinyoklion,
markphelps,
moredip,
rgrassian-split,
skyerus,
tcarrio,
thomaspoignant and
weyert
toddbaert
force-pushed
the
feat/client-extensions
branch
from
b31a2e9 to
f2b30ad
Compare
weyert
requested changes
Jan 19, 2023
Contributor
weyert
left a comment
weyert
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have made a few comments.
moredip
reviewed
Jan 20, 2023
Co-authored-by: Pete Hodgson <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Todd Baert <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Pete Hodgson <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Todd Baert <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Pete Hodgson <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Todd Baert <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Jonathan Norris <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Todd Baert <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Todd Baert <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Todd Baert <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Todd Baert <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Todd Baert <[email protected]>
toddbaert
force-pushed
the
feat/client-extensions
branch
from
03bb721 to
74dbeb6
Compare
kinyoklion
approved these changes
Jul 11, 2023
Member
|
I think it would be helpful to include glossary entries for |
Kavindu-Dodan
approved these changes
Jul 13, 2023
Co-authored-by: Kavindu Dodanduwa <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Todd Baert <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Kavindu Dodanduwa <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Todd Baert <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Todd Baert <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Todd Baert <[email protected]>
beeme1mr
approved these changes
Jul 14, 2023
thomaspoignant
approved these changes
Jul 16, 2023
weyert
approved these changes
Jul 18, 2023
dabeeeenster
approved these changes
Jul 18, 2023
lukas-reining
approved these changes
Jul 18, 2023
fabriziodemaria
approved these changes
Jul 20, 2023
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
14 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR adds new points to support client use-cases. It does this primarily by defining and specifying a new static-context paradigm.
There's a few requirements that now "fork" on the condition that the implementation targets the dynamic context (server) or static context (client) modes. There's no functional changes specified for dynamic context implementations.
For more justification on the above, see the issue here, and the OFEPs linked therein.
Please note that there is some "number thrashing" with these changes. I tried to minimize it, but I think it's more important to have a coherent and sensible spec than to make sure to maintain the mapping between section numbers and content. I found that RFC2616 changed the content of their numbered sections revision to revision as well, so this isn't unprecedented.