As I expressed on the issue, I'd rather remove push, but this seems
acceptable as well.

Ian

On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 7:01 PM Lucas Pardue <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hello WG,
>
> Back in July there was some discussion about potential edge cases related
> to HTTP/3 server push, leading to issue #4930 "Handling of a lost push
> signal" [1] being raised. As a reminder, draft-ietf-quic-http is now in the
> RFC Editor queue following WGLC, IETF Last Call, and gaining approval from
> the IESG.
>
> The proposed resolution to this issue is
> https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/4931. The editor has been
> careful to craft things in such a way to have minimal impact on the HTTP/3
> protocol, while addressing the points raised in issue #4930.
>
> Our responsible AD has asked us to run a consensus call to ensure that the
> WG is happy with this change, before it is incorporated into the document
> as part of AUTH48. This email begins a 1-week consensus call (ending
> September 7 2021, anywhere on earth) for the proposed resolution at
> https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/4931. Absent any pushback,
> we'll work with our AD on the next steps for incorporation.
>
> Best Regards,
> Matt & Lucas
> QUIC WG Chairs
>
>
> [1] - https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4930
>

Reply via email to