- From: Mirja Kühlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
- Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2018 18:08:53 +0000
- To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
- Cc: httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-httpbis-07-00: No Objection 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.) The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-httpbis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I don't think there is a reason to block the charter as currently proposed, however, I have a couple of questions. First an editorial one: should it be "HTTP/2 Revision" instead of "HTTP/1.1 Revision", or maybe just "HTTP Revision(s)"? Then regarding the HTTP and QUIC part. I found it a bit weird and probably also unecessary to mention review intentions in the charter. However, I guess we need at some point to discuss what to do with HTTP/3 after the QUIC group has finsihed their mapping document. Is the intention to do another re-charter then? Should we then maybe just wait until we have a better plan before we say anything about this in ther httpbis charter? The timing doesn't seem to be optional for me here but I assume the recharter is coming up because H2 is basically done...?
Received on Wednesday, 28 November 2018 06:47:09 UTC