IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Who wants -10 drafts?

Rui Paulo <rpaulo@apple.com> Wed, 21 February 2018 01:36 UTC

Return-Path: <rpaulo@apple.com>
X-Original-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A82DC120227 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 17:36:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.311
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.311 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=apple.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yKWdCxvyP3ge for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 17:36:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-in5.apple.com (mail-out5.apple.com [17.151.62.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9193D1200F1 for <quic@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 17:36:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=apple.com; s=mailout2048s; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@apple.com; t=1519176971; x=2383090571; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-id:To:Cc:MIME-version:Content-type: Content-transfer-encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-reply-to:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=tKPlA2ZH5hbX5+Y446ktQViHO6jZd6mKDBpysumMK2c=; b=3vNaWFZAitgXPOa83tiJPBv8JJoAn7QpibNIZHUwihDmW2ALv6cCMAhHomuce6wc Rua5QaP0LNS+ypQrmzDR1UX0twgbjBd/KKEXtLVKC/MF625sFc4u4mvx1Jk1OxN6 HIcMp7oB+UZYOMyAtRDPcqq45MNctWKIckLEDtJ4pL18V9A+dAeUidnBvtosB7+/ ZTdB3OSEkMzIjySOHaPGbRvH+DfHpDYR5F7ClcAmgVOYw7F2Wpy7mjKJaFRkTkNl Pm+41bYEQM51AleDUOvnDOqiVZ04vhOPTgKKkImDCfOB58X7dGEfhCcDzk+jRWT+ H/cYIpzy1JHYXZSiXB3o0Q==;
Received: from relay8.apple.com (relay8.apple.com [17.128.113.102]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail-in5.apple.com (Apple Secure Mail Relay) with SMTP id F3.CC.13704.B0DCC8A5; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 17:36:11 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: 11973e13-ee5ff70000003588-a3-5a8ccd0bc1f3
Received: from nwk-mmpp-sz09.apple.com (nwk-mmpp-sz09.apple.com [17.128.115.80]) by relay8.apple.com (Apple SCV relay) with SMTP id 17.AF.10701.B0DCC8A5; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 17:36:11 -0800 (PST)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Received: from [17.192.155.216] by nwk-mmpp-sz09.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.2.20180130 64bit (built Jan 30 2018)) with ESMTPSA id <0P4H00DKD8GAS270@nwk-mmpp-sz09.apple.com>; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 17:36:11 -0800 (PST)
Sender: rpaulo@apple.com
Subject: Re: Who wants -10 drafts?
From: Rui Paulo <rpaulo@apple.com>
In-reply-to: <CABkgnnVWdRYDKUwgrfTjRmb9q_M9bAiysVYy-zDicGLrEGcvng@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 17:36:10 -0800
Cc: QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Message-id: <4A74CD08-00C9-451A-80E8-E6AD7F644DED@apple.com>
References: <CABkgnnVWdRYDKUwgrfTjRmb9q_M9bAiysVYy-zDicGLrEGcvng@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.6.14)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFtrBLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUi2FCYpst9tifKoOEBn8W1M/8YLXoWcDsw eeycdZfdY8mSn0wBTFFcNimpOZllqUX6dglcGY3du9kK7rNX/GlYzdjA2M3WxcjBISFgIrHr ZUEXIxeHkMAaJomOWb/Yuxg5weLXWt+xQCQOMkp0npjDCJLgFRCU+DH5HgtIM7OAusSUKbkQ Nd8YJaas3c8KUiMsICGx/+RDdghbSWLJo9lMIDYbkP2s7wQ7SC+nQLDElV92IGEWAVWJB9M+ sYDYzALSEmcnrYWytSWevLvACrHWRuL0/yY2EFtIIEDi2p8LYONFBHQlFp19AHWzksSWxv+s IPdICPxkldg9YwrzBEbhWUjOnoVw9iwkKxYwMq9iFMpNzMzRzcwz1UssKMhJ1UvOz93ECArq 6XbCOxhPr7I6xCjAwajEw2uh0xMlxJpYVlyZe4hRmoNFSZzXbydQSCA9sSQ1OzW1ILUovqg0 J7X4ECMTB6dUA2PMXfFnd2cHpl9cGaf/O/j0r8nm2ukT+8P/6vpseOqxNCVxts68Z6e/LnH6 Ye/WbHX3ts8qb+srBUGLZU33LNvfcrs3cs+h/6lMq8UME+fz8Aeztx78rlPQIBl25oXF7huc Z80eF09tkf98y4cxTaxvbllX3lSF+tgXgZzcPy7wFk++9SE/ZYISS3FGoqEWc1FxIgAJ0Bim SwIAAA==
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrDLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUi2FAcoMt9tifK4Hg3j8W1M/8YLXoWcDsw eeycdZfdY8mSn0wBTFFcNimpOZllqUX6dglcGY3du9kK7rNX/GlYzdjA2M3WxcjJISFgInGt 9R1LFyMXh5DAQUaJzhNzGEESvAKCEj8m3wNKcHAwC6hLTJmSC1HzjVFiytr9rCA1wgISEvtP PmSHsJUkljyazQRiswHZz/pOsIP0cgoES1z5ZQcSZhFQlXgw7RMLiM0sIC1xdtJaKFtb4sm7 C6wQa20kTv9vArtNSCBA4tqfC2DjRQR0JRadfcAOcbOSxJbG/6wTGAVmIbl0FsKls5BMXcDI vIpRoCg1J7HSQi+xoCAnVS85P3cTIzgMC9N2MDYttzrEKMDBqMTDa6HTEyXEmlhWXJl7iFGC g1lJhPfy9+4oId6UxMqq1KL8+KLSnNTiQ4zSHCxK4rz+e4GqBdITS1KzU1MLUotgskwcnFIN jD12y1dM7vSXbZsp0PNS+H/9hQbxP732d+JX811YGiR788p9pzMTvyqJSuh3qPzhqg1n1rnL X7f0eUs++wf9sIU3blg57ZR5/PuAfeHFxr/v1JbrLOwLE1zxNcJZ7+M5xasWhZdv75ZonbNv v+anp4VsgaJ3Pk7891tDO1I4RGjnXv1dMuKda5RYijMSDbWYi4oTATmNg8Q/AgAA
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/bGbzPcVTBZ6e-y_R2Yq6-0pVHdQ>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Main mailing list of the IETF QUIC working group <quic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 01:36:13 -0000

On Feb 20, 2018, at 17:00, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I know, I know, you are probably still struggling your way through
> interop with -09, but the editors want to know if people want a set of
> drafts that reference the newly added QCRAM and invariants docs.

I wouldn’t mind and I think a published draft is reviewed by more people.

> There would be no change to interop targets.
> 
> We were originally hoping to include fixes to the bigger open issues,
> but those seem unlikely to resolve in time for the March 5 draft
> submission cutoff.  And now there might be some people who want to try
> out hq-10 now that it has a plausible header compression story.

For the purposes of the interop, I believe we were still doing HTTP 0.9.  Has that changed?

I’m not sure how many people will take advantage of hq-10 interop but I don’t see any harm in publishing -10 drafts.

—
Rui Paulo

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email