Re: [Webtransport] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on charter-ietf-webtrans-00-00: (with COMMENT)

Hi Eric, hi all,

I believe the assumption is that this work will not modify any transport protocol but only “use" it. In this case it looks like an application protocol. Further websockets was in ART and this work seems similar. However, if my assumption are wrong, I’m happy to discuss if TSV is more appropriate!

Mirja

> On 6. Feb 2020, at 13:59, Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
> charter-ietf-webtrans-00-00: No Objection
> 
> 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.)
> 
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-webtrans/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> I will follow the discussion around the BLOCK points of my fellow AD but I
> wonder why this is in ART and not in TSV?
> 
> -éric
> 
> 
> -- 
> Webtransport mailing list
> Webtransport@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webtransport