I would be disappointed if the authors of those drafts did not want some time (even if that was just to ask "WGLC, please?"). These are important drafts. Give David and co-authors all the time that they can use constructively.
The same extends to the quic-lb, applicability, and management drafts. The latter two are really coming together now and it would be good to finish them. I would like to discuss adoption of draft-thomson-quic-bit-grease. It's modestly-well implemented. I also think that it's done. (PR on the agenda incoming.) On Fri, Jan 22, 2021, at 10:33, David Schinazi wrote: > Hi Matt, > > I'd like to discuss these two adopted extensions at 110: > draft-ietf-quic-datagram and draft-ietf-quic-version-negotiation. > > We're working on a significant update to > draft-ietf-quic-version-negotiation that should land soon. > > Let us know if this sounds good, and we'll discuss amongst draft > authors who should present. > > David > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 12:54 PM Matt Joras <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > It is time to start thinking about the agenda for IETF 110. If you have > > topics you would like to discuss please start preparing materials and send > > agenda requests either as a PR against the agenda file > > <https://github.com/quicwg/wg-materials/blob/master/ietf110/agenda.md> > > (preferred) or by email to [email protected]. As always the chairs will > > work on prioritizing WG items and the as time permits portions. > > > > Thanks, > > Lucas and Lars and Matt
