Hey, On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 3:14 PM Ben Schwartz <bemasc@google.com> wrote: > Re: "RFC7838bis", see https://github.com/MikeBishop/dns-alt-svc/issues/246 > > On Sat, Mar 13, 2021 at 5:26 AM Julian Reschke < > julian.reschke@greenbytes.de> wrote: > >> Am 13.03.2021 um 01:23 schrieb RFC Errata System: >> > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7838, >> > "HTTP Alternative Services". >> > >> > -------------------------------------- >> > You may review the report below and at: >> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6481 >> > >> snip >> >> I don't think this is an erratum. >> >> The spec says what the WG agreed upon. >> >> If you're looking for a place to collect improvement ideas for a >> potential RFC7838bis, we can do that on the WG's Github issue tracker. >> > That's a fair point that I'll accept. Where do the HTTP WG collect issues for documents that they are responsible for before any explicit bis work has been started? Ben's example is another thing that seems like a good thing to capture, and I might have another idea in the pipeline. Cheers, Lucas
Received on Monday, 15 March 2021 15:36:40 UTC