- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 14:18:06 +0100
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2014-11-21 02:05, Mark Nottingham wrote: > Hey Greg, > > Good question. > > I'm going to review the discussion and hopefully declare consensus on 9.2.2 today (my time). > > We also have <https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/645>, but I think that's just a matter of making a detailed proposal and getting the text in; I don't imagine it'll be controversial. > > Once Martin is back, we'll roll h2-16 and hpack-10. > > While the diffs between h2-14 and the purported -16 are not small, I think the bulk of them are editorial, and the larger changes are well-understood by the Working Group, so another WGLC is not necessary. Likewise for hpack-10. > > That said, we'll take at least a few days to make sure everyone understand the changes and has a chance to read through. FWIW: <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-latest-from-wglc.diff.html> <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-latest-from-previous.diff.html> So yes, the diffs aren't small at all :-) Best regards, Julian
Received on Monday, 24 November 2014 13:18:41 UTC