Re: Call for adoption - WEBRTC-QUIC


I see what is being added, but I see no explanation in this document or
announcement why it is being added.

What additional functionality or capabilities would QUICK add to webrtc?

Roman Shpount

On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 3:58 AM Harald Alvestrand <>

> * From the Lyon summary of decisions: "The WG will ask the list if we
> should adopt the WEBRTC-QUIC API document (in room: 2 opposed, ~10 in
> favor)" The question is whether we should adopt this document:
> <> as
> a Working Group document Adoption as a WG document does not mean commitment
> to any specific part of the API, or any specific timeline for processing
> the document to CR and beyond, but does mean that we can issue the document
> as a first public working draft (FPWD) and ask for IPR declarations (if
> any). My personal read is that adoption as a WG document means that "we
> have consensus that there is a problem here that needs solving, the problem
> is within the scope of this WG, and this document is a start on the way to
> solving it". Non-adoption would indicate either that the problem shouldn't
> be solved, that the problem is out of scope for this WG, or that this
> document is so far away from the right solution that it's not a starting
> point the WG wants to consider. We are seeking both statements of support
> and statements of opposition. The chairs will tally the responses and
> attempt to draw a conclusion. Please state your opinion to the list on or
> before Wednesday, November 28. Harald, for the chairs *

Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2018 20:10:06 UTC