Hi all, we have yesterday merged all open PRs with editorial changes or clarifications resulting from the IESG review. At this point we have 4 issues left that we would like to check on the mailing list:
#468 IESG review Martin Duke: Section 14 - VN section The text on deploying new version was quite redundant with Section 5 of draft-ietf-quic-version-negotiation. This was the case because this text was written when draft-ietf-quic-version-negotiation wasn't a wg doc yet. The proposed PR removes most of the original text and replaces it only with a short summary. While this change is probably still editorial, given the text change is quite large we wanted to flag it here before merging. This is the PR: https://github.com/quicwg/ops-drafts/pull/485/files #498 IESG Review Roman Danyliw: Section 2 - fallback to insecure We believe that the discussed text has wg consensus and therefore do not have a PR for this issue. The propose is to close this issue with no action. #505 IESG Review Eric Vyncke: guidance on changing IPv6 addresses We created a small PR that adds expiration of a temporary IPv6 addresses (RFC8981) to the list of reasons for migration. This is a rather small change but goes maybe slightly beyond editorial, therefore we flag it here: https://github.com/quicwg/ops-drafts/pull/509/files I#506 ESG review Roman Danyliw: fingerprinting experimental versions Roman asked about the risk of fingerprinting when experimental version are used. We created a PR that recommends to a) registered experimental versions provisionally and b) don't use the them long term or register permanently (so others can use it as well). This is an entirely new paragraph and additional review would be welcome: https://github.com/quicwg/ops-drafts/pull/508 Please review/reply by end of the week. If we don't hear differently, we will merge the remaining PRs on Monday and submit the new versions. Again thanks to all who actively contributed or reviewed these documents! Mirja P.S.: We already merged one PRs that has a new reference to draft-ietf-quic-ack-frequency (https://github.com/quicwg/ops-drafts/pull/503). This is still just a clarification in order to provide a pointer on more guidance for ack handling, however, for the sake of competing flagging it here as well.
