- From: Loïc Hoguin <essen@ninenines.eu>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 12:28:04 +0100
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>, Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com>, Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>, Yoav Weiss <yoav@yoav.ws>
Thanks for the notice. This draft seemed like a good solution to optimize PUSH and I was looking forward to it (mostly for server/API/mobile clients). Are there any plans for an alternative? Thanks, On 14/01/2019 07:29, Mark Nottingham wrote: > After discussion with the editors, the chairs believe that it isn't likely that this draft will be implemented widely enough to justify standardisation - even as Experimental - in the foreseeable future. > > Therefore, we intend to move it to the "dead" state (as described in <https://datatracker.ietf.org/help/state/draft/ietf>). > > Note that if sentiment changes, the draft *can* be "resurrected." If we've misread the signals and there are people intending to implement (especially on the browser side, as that's the primary use case it's designed for), please bring that to our attention. > > Cheers, > > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > > -- Loïc Hoguin https://ninenines.eu
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2019 09:10:05 UTC