- From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 18:56:51 -0700
- To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
- Cc: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-encryption@ietf.org, michael.bishop@microsoft.com, httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, michael.bishop@microsoft.com, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-encryption-10: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-encryption/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm balloting "yes", but I have a few minor comments: - Abstract: I agree with the GenART review that the limitations should be mentioned in the abstract, or at least early in the document. - Note to readers: Will this stay in the RFC? - Introduction: What is the nature of the experiment? Is there an expectation to promote it to standards track in the future? Even if the answer is "We need to get implementation/deployment experience", it's helpful to say "out loud".
Received on Thursday, 16 March 2017 01:57:25 UTC