Re: [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ohai-ohttp-06

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Peter,

You are the first to review the new revision, so thanks.

https://github.com/ietf-wg-ohai/oblivious-http/pull/235 contains most of the fixes here.

On Fri, Dec 16, 2022, at 16:37, Peter Yee via Datatracker wrote:
> Page 6, section
> 2.1, 1st bullet item: should this be “two additional regular HTTP requests”
> instead of “two regular HTTP requests”?

The typical deployment - where gateway and target are colocated - only involves two requests in total.  The "at least" exists here to imply that there might be more, though the two is a hard minimum (or minumum, I guess).

> Page 8, 3rd full paragraph (“Encoding..”), 3rd sentence: The len() function
> doesn’t appear to be referenced anywhere else in the document, at least from a
> cursory search. Delete the sentence if the function is unneeded.

Good catch.

> Page 9, section 3.2, figure 2: Is 262140 the right number here? It’s not
> divisible by 32. I would have thought it needed to be.

Yeah, that's a straight-up mistake; it doesn't even divide by 8.  Also, I realized that this doesn't define what the length field means for the subsequent field.  That's a big error that I'll correct separately.

> Page 17, section 5.2, 3rd paragraph, 2nd sentence: append a comma after
> “malformed”.

I think that the rules say you don't need commas until your list has 3 items.

-- 
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux