Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-16.txt

My colleagues and I would be interested in seeing the spec proceed to IESG
as well.

Thanks,
Biren

On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Salvatore Loreto <
salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com> wrote:
>
>
> +1
> I do think both HTTP/2 and HPACK documents are ready for advancement
> and they should get submitted to IESG asap
> so that the IETF last call and the IESG review can start before the
> vacation period
>
> br
> Salvatore
>
> On Dec 13, 2014, at 9:43 PM, "DRUTA, DAN" <dd5826@att.com>
>  wrote:
>
> > I also think we should get the documents submitted for IESG review
> sooner rather than waiting a few extra days.
> > Holiday season is around the corner and any delay will push the review
> window further out.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dan
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Gabriel Montenegro [mailto:Gabriel.Montenegro@microsoft.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 11:17 PM
> > To: Mark Nottingham; HTTP Working Group
> > Subject: RE: I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-16.txt
> >
> > Hi Mark,
> >
> >> Our issues list is empty, and I believe we have consensus to publish
> these
> >> documents.
> >
> > We agree.
> >
> >> Please have a look at the changes in this as well as HPACK-10, to
> verify that
> >> they incorporate the changes as discussed.
> >>
> >> I'm going to prepare the shepherd writeups and -- barring any surprises
> --
> >> submit them all for publication in a couple of days.
> >
> > Both HTTP/2 and HPACK are ready for advancement to IESG in our opinion.
> Is there any reason to wait even more days?
> >
> >
>
>