Hi Martin, Thanks for your review. I've opened up GitHub issues for these on the QUIC WG repository. See responses inline for the URLs. All QPACK issues are tracked under this milestone: https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/milestone/28
On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 8:29 PM Martin Duke via Datatracker < [email protected]> wrote: > Martin Duke has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-quic-qpack-20: Yes > > 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.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-quic-qpack/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > A couple of very minor points: > > 3.2 I think it would be more accurate to say that each HTTP/3 endpoint > holds > two dynamic tables, not one, one in each direction. I'm assuming that the > dynamic tables are in fact distinct. > https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4748 > 3.2.1. s/32/32 bytes > https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4749 Cheers Lucas On behalf of QUIC WG Chairs
