Re: Consensus on Deploying QUIC v1 with HTTP/3

[Julian Reschke <[e-mail]>]

Am 06.05.2021 um 01:18 schrieb Lucas Pardue:
> Dear QUIC WG,
>
> (HTTP WG is bcc'd)
>
> As you may be aware, the QUIC v1 specifications entered AUTH48 state
> recently and they are making good progress (thanks editors!). The HTTP/3
> and QPACK documents have a dependency on the "HTTP core" documents being
> worked on in the HTTP WG, so we expect them to take a little longer.
>
> The drafts submitted to the RFC editor define QUIC version "0x00000001"
> [1] and HTTP/3 ALPN identifier "h3". They include the clear instruction
> "DO NOT DEPLOY THIS VERSION OF {QUIC, HTTP/3} UNTIL IT IS IN AN RFC".
>
> HTTP/3 is explicitly tied to a version - the "h3" identifier is expected
> to be used with QUIC "0x00000001". As several folks have observed on the
> list [3][4] or in Slack, once the QUIC RFCs are published, 0x00000001
> can be used in deployment. But the longer lead time for HTTP/3 RFC
> creates some grey area on what ALPN to use. Waiting for the HTTP/3 RFC
> delays deployment of QUIC version 1 at the earliest convenience, which
> is unfortunate given that the design has IETF consensus.
>
> The Chairs have tracked various discussions and we believe there is
> significant deployer interest in deploying "h3" as soon as the QUIC RFCs
> are published and before the HTTP/3 RFC is published. Furthermore, on
> balance of the information at hand, we observe a minimal perceived risk
> with deploying "h3" before the HTTP/3 RFC.
>
> This email commences a formal consensus call for permitting the
> deployment of QUIC "0x00000001" with HTTP/3 ALPN identifier "h3" *once
> the QUIC RFCs are published*. The call will end on May 13. Please reply
> to this thread on the QUIC WG list with any additional comments,
> thoughts or objections before then.
> ...

You may want to clarify what *exactly* you mean by "the QUIC RFCs".

Best regards, Julian