search

ietf-wg-httpapi / ratelimit-headers

Repository for IETF WG draft ratelimit-headers
Other
42 stars 4 forks source link

BCP178 violation (x- prefix on parameters) #103

Closed mnot closed 2 years ago

mnot commented 2 years ago

To avoid clashes, implementers SHOULD prefix unregistered parameters with an x-<vendor> identifier, e.g. x-acme-policy, x-acme-burst.

See BCP178.

ioggstream commented 2 years ago

iirc there was a discussion on x- stuff. In general I'm ok with just acme- @unleashed do you see any issue with that?

unleashed commented 2 years ago

No issue, I was aware of the BCP and I think this case fits the first provision for segregating the name spaces in the Appendix B, so any one of the proposed solutions there, including yours, is fine with me.