add(considered): RFC 10036 Incremental is registered, not deployed - #205
Draft
jdevalk wants to merge 1 commit into
Draft
add(considered): RFC 10036 Incremental is registered, not deployed#205jdevalk wants to merge 1 commit into
jdevalk wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
The Incremental header is in scope — origin-set, on the wire, with an outcome a visitor feels — but it was published a month ago and nothing we can find reads it yet. Record the turn-down with what would reverse it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Deploying specification-website with
|
| Latest commit: |
6784809
|
| Status: | ✅ Deploy successful! |
| Preview URL: | https://3038a73f.specification-website.pages.dev |
| Branch Preview URL: | https://considered-incremental-forwa.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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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 entry in the
/considered/register:src/content/considered/incremental-forwarding.md,reason: too-early.No spec page, no changelog entry, no derived surfaces touched — same shape as #197 and #199.
Why now
RFC 10036 — Incremental Forwarding of HTTP Messages was published by HTTPbis in August 2026. It registers a single Structured Fields boolean header,
Incremental;Incremental: ?1tells intermediaries not to buffer the whole message before forwarding it.I am recording rather than dropping it because it clears the scope bar that most new standards fail. It is set by the origin, it is visible on the wire, and the outcome is one a visitor experiences directly — a streamed response arriving progressively instead of in one lump when a CDN finally releases it. That is a website property, not a build technique.
Why not a page yet
Adoption. Published one month ago, and I could find no reader: no MDN page or BCD key, no Chrome Platform Status entry, and no mention in the CDN documentation or changelogs I checked. The RFC itself anticipates a transition period where unaware intermediaries ignore the field. A page today would recommend a header that changes nothing on any reader's path — the case the "adoption, not finality" rule exists for.
revisitis set to an intermediary honouring it; since Kazuho Oku (h2o, Fastly) is a co-author, an h2o release note is probably the earliest credible signal.Note
This is a judgement call, so flagging it rather than presenting it as settled: if you would rather have the page now on the strength of the RFC and the authorship, say so and I will write it and delete this entry in the same PR.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code