Re: #578 [was: Straw Poll: Restore Header Table and Static Table Indices]

[Amos Jeffries <[e-mail]>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 22/10/2014 1:53 p.m., Mark Nottingham wrote:
> This thread seems to be going off into defining an extension, which
> is entirely appropriate.
> 
> I'm not seeing broad acclaim for making any changes to the existing
> scheme in the spec itself; in particular, Jeff's proposal failed to
> get wide support.
> 
> So, I think we can mark #578 as closed without action.

I see only an extension for the unrelated timestamp things.


Can we try seriously for a consensus on just Willys' patch to separate
the tables?

Other proposals got their own "vote" threads and many days before a
consensus/non-consensus was declared. This one has only just had 25hrs
buried at the back end of a long heated discussion.

It is distinct from Jeff's reversal proposal and offers benefits to
all participant "camps" over both that and the status quo. I fear it
has got lost amidst this long thread on a rushed timescale.

Amos

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJURxbvAAoJELJo5wb/XPRjIDsH/0kTj4EDsoirb9oy885Y+n8Z
+8VQIRCYKlgrOXqmLBj9bNbFrCXA3M9P/ByeN9s9lFdF+T02j4klo69Ia08c/AJs
iFoQx49ca7l09JPwn5fAsxIVW6NbkJV9OKJjpXTQ2tuWrjr9U+ah0Z9UczYhNI+W
tRrcRQ+ir8LSs43tUjZKt+AkLpWLRuTY6/eLF1Ni9mZlr7Paye/Ckr2NcjRWYmIN
IBoXdtnE/Upzq2Rf6MVWpH9y/vcBaCe2O4MziuziMqaITV2+MUXkgwng1z6sKiBe
yCapsSiAeFjoJqKDDCzJHxb/TVD6+qo6bbgXqNYZ3ionHOtDB25ipvzbYWFtyKo=
=dmQu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----