Subject: -http and -qpack - Resolution of design issues identified during IESG Review

From: Lucas Pardue <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2021 00:32:37 +0000

Hello,

In response to the IESG Review of the QUIC WG -http and -qpack documents,
individual GitHub issues were opened and the documents moved to the
"Revised I-D Needed" state.

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
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Acall-issued+label%3A-http
and
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Acall-issued+label%3A-qpack

In line with how we handled resolving the last set of IESG design issues,
rather than issue a WG consensus call, the editors have published new
drafts -http-34 and -qpack-21. These address the Design issues listed below
by incorporating the associated proposed resolutions. This email serves to
boost the visibility of these Design issues, now marked with a
"call-issued" label, in order to allow the WG and the IESG to comment on
the proposed resolutions. Note however that at this late stage, if the WG
push back against issues discussed between editors, ADs and IESG members,
we risk invalidating the review and needing to start over.

* HTTP/3 authority diverged from SEMANTICS -
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4761
  The proposed resolution is https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/4808

* Roman Danyliw's HTTP/3 Comment 1 -
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4763
  The proposed resolution is https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/4808

* Roman Danyliw's HTTP/3 Comment 2 -
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4764
  The proposed resolution is https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/4808

* Mandating use of CN-ID is not modern practice (aka Ben's HTTP/3 Discuss
1) - https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4769
  The proposed resolution is https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/4808

* Ben Kaduk's HTTP/3 Discuss 2 -
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4775
  The proposed resolution is https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/4808

* Ben Kaduk's HTTP/3 Comment 4 -
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4779
  The proposed resolution is close with no design change but make the
editorial improvement https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/4819

* Defer to core HTTP for 421 status code -
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4790
  The proposed resolution is https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/4808

Cheers
Lars, Lucas & Matt
QUIC WG Co-chairs

---

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2021 08:07:27 +0000

Thanks,

If anyone have issues with these changes please raise them prior to 17th of
February. I intended to approve the documents then if no issues have been
raised.

Cheers

Magnus

On Wed, 2021-02-03 at 00:32 +0000, Lucas Pardue wrote:
> individual GitHub issues were opened and the documents moved to the "Revised
> I-D Needed" state.
> 
> 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 
> rather than issue a WG consensus call, the editors have published new drafts
> -http-34 and -qpack-21. These address the Design issues listed below by
> incorporating the associated proposed resolutions. This email serves to boost
> the visibility of these Design issues, now marked with a "call-issued" label,
> in order to allow the WG and the IESG to comment on the proposed resolutions.
> Note however that at this late stage, if the WG push back against issues
> discussed between editors, ADs and IESG members, we risk invalidating the
> review and needing to start over.
> 
> * Mandating use of CN-ID is not modern practice (aka Ben's HTTP/3 Discuss 1) -
> https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4769