________________________________
From: Lucas Pardue <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, December 6, 2021 8:04 PM
To: Tommy Pauly
Cc: Zaheduzzaman Sarker; [email protected]; IETF QUIC WG
Subject: Re: AD review: draft-ietf-quic-datagram-06
Thanks for the review Zahed
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 6:17 PM Tommy Pauly
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi Zahed,
Thanks for the review!
On Dec 6, 2021, at 5:53 AM, Zaheduzzaman Sarker
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
Hi,
Thanks for well written and short document.
This document have following text in the abstract and introduction –
“Discussion of this work is encouraged to happen on the QUIC IETF mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> or on the GitHub repository which contains
the draft:
https://github.com/quicwg/datagram<https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=31323334-501d5122-fe22d327-454445555731-d8c57b11f2359f3e&q=1&e=0-f9b6d5030a51aeefed5614fa71de1ba1&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fquicwg%2Fdatagram>.”
I don’t think we need to have them at this stage of this document. Please
remove them.
Looking at RFC9000, this was around even in the last version prior to RFC
publication (draft-ietf-quic-transport-34). I don’t think it’s beneficial to
remove this now.
+1, As a compromise, perhaps add an RFC editor note to remove the note before
publication?
Yes, that would work.
Thanks
