[Doh] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on charter-ietf-doh-00-05: (with COMMENT)

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Thu, 14 September 2017 14:13 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: doh-chairs@ietf.org, doh@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <150539842586.12537.10469544387783752570.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2017 07:13:45 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/doh/lsU9tYELB0vyfpXHuFd0Rp2EVew>
Subject: [Doh] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on charter-ietf-doh-00-05: (with COMMENT)

Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-doh-00-05: 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-doh/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------


I think I agree with MT's point that it would be best if this binding
were agnostic about HTTP/2 over TLS versus HTTPS over QUIC (or
whatever we call it) and to the extent possible, agnostic about HTTP/2
versus HTTP/1.1 (i.e., the binding should be indifferent for the
functionality that don't depend on explicit HTTP/2 features like
push). However, I think we could send the charter out for review
w/o deciding that.

[Doh] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on charter-iet… Eric Rescorla