- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 21:18:50 +0000
- To: Van Catha <vans554@gmail.com>
- cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Takeshi Yoshino <tyoshino@google.com>, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, Andy Green <andy@warmcat.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Wenbo Zhu <wenboz@google.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
-------- In message <CAG-EYCiVExcyHLoXB1ixQCKduxUPTVOnVX1XrmFJ3b72Y8AAFg@mail.gmail.com> , Van Catha writes: >So can we form a new WG then and focus on doing this right vs making >WebSocket2. The focus earlier was to get the already coded clients and API >(websocket API) to be able to work with websockets layered on HTTP2/QUIC, >if we are in it for the long haul now we might as well form a new group and >create something more long term? Apologies for asking a stupid question, but isn't that exactly what QUIC is all about in the first place ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Sunday, 27 November 2016 21:19:21 UTC