Re: Call for Consensus: #578

Are there anyone who implemented proposal 3 and vetified that it shows the
satisfying results with custom header dominated data?

Best regards,
Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
 2014/10/22 14:08 "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>:

> <https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/578>
>
> We've straw polled the before, but after further discussion we have
> another proposal for this issue.
>
> The proposals for this issue are now:
>
> 1) Close with no change (status quo).
>
> 2) Jeff's proposal: <
> https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/578#issuecomment-58030551>
>
> 3) Willy's proposal: <http://www.w3.org/mid/20141020165353.GA25743@1wt.eu>
>
> Please state which you support (multiples are fine), as well as what you
> can't live with (and, briefly, why).
>
>
> A word about how I'll judge consensus -- as we are post-WGLC, we are only
> entertaining changes that fall into one of four categories:
>
> a) editorial improvements
> b) substantial interop problems
> c) serious security issues
> d) changes that have broad consensus (i.e., we all agree it's worth it)
>
> Our AD has said that it's entirely appropriate to raise the bar in this
> manner as we get closer to delivery.
>
> As such, proposal #2 and #3 above can only fall under (d). What I'm
> looking for here, then, is for *strong* support (as in, very few if any
> detractors) for either (2) or (3); if making these changes is
> controversial, we haven't met the bar for (d) and so #1 wins the day.
>
> When we straw polled this before, many people said that they didn't want
> to see any change; what I'm specifically looking for is whether they've
> changed their minds.
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
>
>
>