Re: Resolution of design issues identified during IESG Review

Benjamin Kaduk <> Wed, 13 January 2021 23:23 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D52D43A02BC; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 15:23:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.92
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mw71ckf0OTrl; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 15:23:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D91EF3A0147; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 15:23:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ([]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 10DNNWIR018834 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 13 Jan 2021 18:23:37 -0500
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 15:23:32 -0800
From: Benjamin Kaduk <>
To: QUIC WG <>
Cc: The IESG <>
Subject: Re: Resolution of design issues identified during IESG Review
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <>
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
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: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 23:23:41 -0000

On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 11:32:35AM +0200, Lars Eggert wrote:
> Hi,
> in response to the IESG Review of the QUIC transport, tls, recovery and invariants documents, individual GitHub issues were opened and the documents moved to the "Revised I-D Needed" state. (The HTTP/3 and QPACK IESG reviews will happen at a later date.)
> The editors have been hard at work triaging and responding to the issues. Thanks to a concerted effort, most of the issues have already been resolved. Some were deemed to require no action and have been closed, some were Editorial issues that have been addressed by PRs that have been merged into the working copies. The remaining issues have been identified as Design issues, see
> As previously mentioned, we are boosting the visibility of these Design issues in order to allow the WG and the IESG to comment on the proposed resolutions:

I'm satisfied with the proposed resolutions for my issues.

I'd also like to take this opportunity to apologize to the editors, chairs
and WG as a whole: despite my significant efforts, the quality of my review
comments failed to meet my expectations for myself, leading to a lot of
essentially wasted effort in translating ballot comments to github issues,
explaining why there is no issue, and closing out issues with no change.
I'm sorry that happened, and needless to say, I will specifically endeavor
to avoid a repeat next week for the h3 documents.

With remorse,