Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Make transport parameter ID and length varint (#3294)

Kazuho Oku <> Wed, 11 December 2019 03:21 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1818F120219 for <>; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 19:21:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.998
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zYCjYjSZuv8f for <>; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 19:21:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39BCA1200F5 for <>; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 19:21:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59F609607D4 for <>; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 19:21:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1576034482; bh=fvb4fJiNyxNjc2zrAnrn5EuQec9XQetPuZoe30hYu3U=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=F+IZJmupctCpgOb3WxF4qY64v4bq1Bq9ID21ZW+CpCCwHvDCxrBKCBeM67eyinH4+ cOMSnXtWz6YdAYNFSyr+L3Wi4qYHTAFBF3S/u3hPWNiGOMdr3PbMdY5qlNkpD8qpR+ S5jDGFudx4hXXR47ga4Z0UnAhgPkJqR/qYyKbVmg=
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 19:21:22 -0800
From: Kazuho Oku <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3294/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Make transport parameter ID and length varint (#3294)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5df060b24af26_6f143fbcf26cd95c1764c7"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: kazuho
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2019 03:21:25 -0000

> @dtikhonov apologies for splitting hairs, but since we're discussing process: the QUIC WG does not establish consensus in meeting rooms. All decisions are made in consensus calls from the chairs on the mailing list.

I'm sorry to point this out, but if we are to discuss about process, isn't it the case that the consensus call for resolving #3020 has ended on Monday? Quoting from

> * #3020: Transport parameter registry is too constraining for innovation
>   The proposal is <>

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: