[httpapi] Weekly github digest (HTTPAPI WG Activity Summary)
Repository Activity Summary Bot <do_not_reply@mnot.net> Sun, 21 March 2021 08:16 UTC
Return-Path: <do_not_reply@mnot.net>
X-Original-To: httpapi@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: httpapi@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EB973A18FC for <httpapi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 01:16:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=sHpyoURx; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=PqRshyz2
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wRsQ0udHkfOS for <httpapi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 01:16:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6A673A18FA for <httpapi@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 01:16:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6511A16DE for <httpapi@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 03:38:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 21 Mar 2021 03:38:56 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h= content-type:mime-version:from:to:subject:message-id:date; s= fm2; bh=Nf+xhLvaLknHXkf35GaR/75/f4I9lF7FF+Io9mNkjDM=; b=sHpyoURx wZUyhdojwJ+8JXBsNCvFiioapYcZIEDeiBVDEh6FFgeR8EXkVSwdQ4Vdv842wUbk TjToToJppBp5tip9nlkVdgrr+B/BqT9mwZJ28O9LPHeJenPhhrbe5qZPTXpOBWOZ SXCYc0CYn1CH18Mg5TBjWbvV7Iv3cFBFBUS4VB5JQxb0paEZgwho+W4aPlSbThPE tgws/crAZMvNBFXPi8gfPwGudXhXwxX/6VW3KzrEz+YksM2K/e+Qol9IxmDr4NlI F4mVln2xg0LzdC5i61GrFKauVHs75+fBgq2+A/PT483HN3nhfy2sGPDiCJjzUC7T G6GqgBn0LdiH7Q==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:message-id :mime-version:subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=Nf+xhLvaLknHXkf35GaR/75/f4I9l F7FF+Io9mNkjDM=; b=PqRshyz2jsRlaZ7pnbHbakPlNJ7f8S7Apsb01W3mRpHHF rojwohMrT/ktr9N2Xbq9PbyHM/WiUvF67UCPAUoM6hxBXZTYDKFDPeGcLHapdjQA lEUwh2iOjBTL/04TTL7ZVhoMrh/0JK8p/Zzg0XWKfB8FfXlBMRYMx8wx762WC1uS S202dp2xyYmrXOe5nhB4ByKozM1k+fEwaJaK/fXcsHxs1trdnFuBm3mlNR7Ic4r3 n8YgMLDvQOZ5Br1BzU62BBVpDBD1xAfXBF0jkPfV6wXsQh7WuSykYd2Oj6fBkkWs /D2tSA6fC+kHsfGj+JigbRfZ6ylIz8kFWARKCpFmQ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:D_hWYBkPk7w8ptVHTvrl4il8GV5WvX9rpGNYabFobEHHb_2ApiV9og> <xme:D_hWYM3_L0tWsebtXw6dx09FsGq8_2evraWE-NJbwgub-3hTNt0WDsAEQWpsStaQc 4NujVrRe9TTmOBUHA>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrudeguddgudduvdcutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurheptggghffvufesrgdttdertddtje enucfhrhhomheptfgvphhoshhithhorhihucettghtihhvihhthicuufhumhhmrghrhicu uehothcuoeguohgpnhhothgprhgvphhlhiesmhhnohhtrdhnvghtqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpeekfedvudetjedvfeekheeiveeugfefhfetteevgeffkefffeetffdvleehudei teenucffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmnecukfhppeehvddrvdehuddruddvtd drudehleenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpeegnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhm peguohgpnhhothgprhgvphhlhiesmhhnohhtrdhnvght
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:D_hWYHpwnrEQd4JTRbue9g3eyyb4ZBtpFssY9FukG8RF5usbj1aTvw> <xmx:D_hWYBns3rrp6Uwh_RyTW23nrekhEwHWu1tHkP0xhIxe1YEzMB75ww> <xmx:D_hWYP3AWGrBiXzfVuddbEoWjlgtdyWL4Pk_K56tsKzGD4gm7YUfQg> <xmx:EPhWYI8BVE2iaWvoiMrBFl5zgi-BHLe30GaBEQNp9l0JrAd3c3SRlQ>
Received: from fv-az194-582.internal.cloudapp.net (unknown [52.251.120.159]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id D68EE108005C for <httpapi@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 03:38:55 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="===============4280361573292046077=="
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Repository Activity Summary Bot <do_not_reply@mnot.net>
To: httpapi@ietf.org
Message-Id: <20210321073855.D68EE108005C@mailuser.nyi.internal>
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 03:38:55 -0400
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/httpapi/fAJNZvnOCOX6qJHvihHq-Fj3iLU>
Subject: [httpapi] Weekly github digest (HTTPAPI WG Activity Summary)
X-BeenThere: httpapi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Building Blocks for HTTP APIs <httpapi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/httpapi>, <mailto:httpapi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/httpapi/>
List-Post: <mailto:httpapi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:httpapi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/httpapi>, <mailto:httpapi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 08:16:13 -0000
Events without label "editorial"
Issues
------
* ietf-wg-httpapi/deprecation-header (+3/-0/💬2)
3 issues created:
- Clarification on multiplicity of deprecation links (by darrelmiller)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/deprecation-header/issues/9
- Definition of resource context (by darrelmiller)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/deprecation-header/issues/8
- Deprecation scope (by darrelmiller)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/deprecation-header/issues/7
2 issues received 2 new comments:
- #6 proposed example: redirect to new location (1 by sdatspun2)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/deprecation-header/issues/6
- #5 reconsider re-use of RFC 5829 link relations (1 by sdatspun2)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/deprecation-header/issues/5
* ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers (+11/-3/💬22)
11 issues created:
- `Limit` parameter registry (by ioggstream)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/49
- Is Limit really backwards-compatible as an SFV? (by ucarion)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/45
- Defining the Content-Type and content of the response (by mfortini)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/44
- Variable Rate Limit Rules (by mfortini)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/43
- Section 2.2 (by mfortini)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/42
- HTTP Response Codes and Rate Limit Headers (by mfortini)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/41
- Security Considerations (by mfortini)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/40
- Section 4 (by mfortini)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/39
- Section 8.1.4 and Appendix B.3. (by mfortini)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/38
- Section 8.3.1 (and 3.1) (by mfortini)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/37
- Pre-Emptive Client Backoff (by mfortini)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/36
11 issues received 22 new comments:
- #45 Clarify Limit's compatibility with existing implementations (5 by ioggstream, ucarion, unleashed)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/45
- #44 Defining the Content-Type and content of the response (1 by ioggstream)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/44
- #43 Variable Rate Limit Rules (3 by V7k3ng, ioggstream, unleashed)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/43 [discussion]
- #42 Status code when `RateLimit-Remaining: 0` (2 by V7k3ng, ioggstream)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/42 [info]
- #41 HTTP Response Codes and Rate Limit Headers (1 by ioggstream)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/41
- #40 Security Considerations (3 by V7k3ng, ioggstream, unleashed)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/40 [design]
- #39 Section 4 (1 by ioggstream)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/39
- #38 Section 8.1.4 and Appendix B.3. (1 by ioggstream)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/38
- #37 Section 8.3.1 (and 3.1) (1 by ioggstream)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/37
- #36 Pre-Emptive Client Backoff (2 by ioggstream, unleashed)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/36
- #11 Define headers dependencies (2 by ioggstream, unleashed)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/11
3 issues closed:
- Pre-Emptive Client Backoff https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/36
- Section 8.1.4 and Appendix B.3. https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/38
- Section 4 https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/issues/39
* ietf-wg-httpapi/linkset (+0/-0/💬1)
1 issues received 1 new comments:
- #8 need to define extensibility model for the JSON media type (1 by dret)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/linkset/issues/8
* ietf-wg-httpapi/rfc7807bis (+0/-0/💬2)
2 issues received 2 new comments:
- #8 Should JSON schema be used to describe Problem Details Object? (1 by asbjornu)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/rfc7807bis/issues/8
- #7 Repository of common Problem types (1 by mnot)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/rfc7807bis/issues/7
Pull requests
-------------
* ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers (+3/-2/💬4)
3 pull requests submitted:
- Fix: #41. Clarify interactions with 3xx. (by ioggstream)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/pull/48
- Fix: #36. No specific throttling behavior. (by ioggstream)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/pull/47
- Fix: #38. FAQ about pinning status codes. (by ioggstream)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/pull/46
3 pull requests received 4 new comments:
- #48 Fix: #41. Clarify interactions with 3xx. (2 by ioggstream, unleashed)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/pull/48
- #34 Fix: #23. Cap conveyed throughput. See #19. (1 by ucarion)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/pull/34
- #32 Improve spec goal. See #26 (1 by ioggstream)
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/pull/32
2 pull requests merged:
- Fix: #36. No specific throttling behavior.
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/pull/47
- Fix: #38. FAQ about pinning status codes.
https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers/pull/46
Repositories tracked by this digest:
-----------------------------------
* https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/deprecation-header
* https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/ratelimit-headers
* https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/linkset
* https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/wg-materials
* https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/rfc7807bis
- [httpapi] Weekly github digest (HTTPAPI WG Activi… Repository Activity Summary Bot