On Thu, 19 Feb 2015, Paul Hoffman wrote:
On Feb 19, 2015, at 10:09 AM, Sean Turner <turners(_at_)ieca(_dot_)com> wrote:
On Feb 19, 2015, at 10:16, Michael Richardson
<mcr+ietf(_at_)sandelman(_dot_)ca> wrote:
I propose that this document skip PS, and go straight to Internet Standard
to
accurately reflect the status of this document.
Six months after it gets an RFC# I?d completely support this.
Good god, no. HTTP/2 is quite complex, and it is likely that at least
some parts will turn out to be non-optimal. Please give the HTTPBIS WG
at least a year to shake out the protocol after wide deployment and
constant use. Rushing the WG just so we can feel good about slapping a
near-meaningless feel-good label on the spec is not a good process.
Counter-proposal: we let the people closest to the protocol, the WG that
created it, decide when to ask for STD status.
There are at least two design choices I wouldn't accept as final w/o real
world experience. I don't want to open that discussion now but I will be
watching deployement results and feedback from 'outside' implementers.
No way should we jump to 'standard' now.
Dave Morris