Robert Wilton's Abstain on draft-ietf-quic-transport-33: (with COMMENT)

Robert Wilton via Datatracker <> Fri, 08 January 2021 13:23 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B9963A0DEA; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 05:23:15 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Robert Wilton via Datatracker <>
To: "The IESG" <>
Subject: Robert Wilton's Abstain on draft-ietf-quic-transport-33: (with COMMENT)
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.24.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Robert Wilton <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2021 05:23:15 -0800
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Main mailing list of the IETF QUIC working group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2021 13:23:15 -0000

Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-quic-transport-33: Abstain

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.)

Please refer to
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:


As per my prior discuss comments on email, I'm generally supportive of this
protocol and document, but don't support how it defines the spin-bit which is
likely to negatively impact network operations and manageability.  Hopefully,
as the industry gains experience from its deployment, future versions of this
protocol will act to mitigate the manageability issues (including measuring
packet loss) that are being raised by network operators.