change(considered): record Unencoded-Digest as too-early - #197
Draft
jdevalk wants to merge 1 commit into
Draft
Conversation
draft-ietf-httpbis-unencoded-digest is in the RFC Editor queue and both fields hold provisional IANA registrations, but nothing emits or checks them. Our Digest Fields page is already `optional` on thin deployment of Content-Digest; a sibling with less deployment than that does not earn a page yet. Written up as the reference case for registration not being adoption. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Deploying specification-website with
|
| Latest commit: |
024d6bd
|
| Status: | ✅ Deploy successful! |
| Preview URL: | https://73cf79a8.specification-website.pages.dev |
| Branch Preview URL: | https://considered-unencoded-digest.specification-website.pages.dev |
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
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
What changed
One new
/considered/entry: Unencoded-Digest and Want-Unencoded-Digest (reason: too-early). No spec page, no other files touched.Why now
The daily scan picked up
Unencoded-Digest/Want-Unencoded-Digestas new provisional entries in the IANA HTTP Field Name registry (registry last updated 2026-08-28). They are close to publication — draft-ietf-httpbis-unencoded-digest-05 is an HTTP WG document sitting in the RFC Editor queue awaiting an editor, with SECDIR "Ready" and GENART "Ready w/nits".They are also unimplemented. No CDN emits them, no server produces them, no client checks them. Per the adoption bar in CONTRIBUTING.md and the routine, that is a turn-down rather than a page — and per CLAUDE.md, a turn-down gets recorded here rather than dropped.
The supporting argument is that our existing Digest Fields page is already
optionalbecauseContent-Digestdeployment is thin. A sibling field with strictly less deployment than that cannot clear a bar its parent barely clears.The generalising bit
The entry is written up as the reference case for registration is not adoption — the specific failure mode that scanning IANA registries invites, since a provisional entry looks like a fact about the web and is only a fact about who filed it. Worth having on the record given how much of this scan's input is registry diffs.
Revisit condition
Any server, CDN or client emitting or checking
Unencoded-Digestwithout a hand-written recipe — Cloudflare or Fastly adding it beside their existingContent-Digestsupport being the clearest signal.Verification
npm run buildpasses; the entry renders at/considered/and its two inline/spec/security/digest-fields/links resolve againstdist/.Draft — not for merge without review.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code