Re: status of webrtc-quic

The Stockholm interim decided that it wanted more information about the
use cases that raise the questions for which QUIC may be the answer.

My personal take is that we're likely to adopt it once we've gotten our
act together on use cases (we need a QUIC API, and this looks like a
good start), so my willingness to spend cycles on fixing template issues
is fairly limited.


On 08/29/2018 11:18 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> The QUIC API for WebRTC [0] asserts it is an Editor's Draft, which is a
> spec status [1] reserved for official working group documents. However,
> as far as I can see, this work item is not listed in the WG charter [2],
> a call for adoption has not yet been issued on this mailing list, and
> the summary of decisions from the Stockholm interim [3] indicates that
> we did not have consensus to adopt.
>
> Shouldn't this spec be "unofficial" at this point?
>
> And should we have a web platform test in place [4] for something that's
> unofficial?
>
> Peter
>
> [0] https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-quic/
>
> [1] https://github.com/w3c/respec/wiki/specStatus
>
> [2] https://www.w3.org/2018/07/webrtc-charter.html
>
> [3] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2018Jun/0191.html
>
> [4]
> https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/blob/297722ededba1c80e2a8768100129af300f67dbf/webrtc/RTCQuicTransport.https.html
>

-- 
Surveillance is pervasive. Go Dark.