Second Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-encryption-10

Sending with a new Subject to make sure people see it. 

Let's say it'll last until at least 9 Feb.

Cheers,

> On 2 Feb 2017, at 6:28 am, Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com> wrote:
> 
> I would agree that the changes are pretty substantial, both in text and spirit.  A short second WGLC seems like a good idea.  Everyone give it a fresh read (I'll do likewise) and post any feedback to the list.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Nottingham [mailto:mnot@mnot.net] 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 10:08 PM
> To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
> Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>
> Subject: Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-encryption-10
> 
> I know we're pretty exhausted with this one, but I do observe that the change since WGLC on this one are pretty substantial:
>  https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-encryption-04&url2=draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-encryption-10
> 
> However, Mike is Document Shepherd on this one, so I'll let him make the call as to whether we need another WGLC. Personally, I think if we do have one, a week or so would be sufficient.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 
>> On 1 Feb 2017, at 4:17 pm, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> I've just posted an update to this doc:
>> 
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-encryption/
>> 
>> This incorporates my best attempt to address the comments Kari had on 
>> the last version.  If this is OK, I think that Mark should ask the 
>> IESG to publish this as Experimental.
>> 


--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/

Received on Friday, 3 February 2017 01:20:06 UTC