This draft is a good starting point for multipath work, and it seems to be the right time to take on this work. I support adoption.
Best, Tommy > On Jan 13, 2022, at 7:14 AM, Lucas Pardue <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Greeting QUIC WG members, > > During IETF 113 Mirja presented [1] about the unified multipath QUIC proposal > in draft-lmbdhk-quic-multipath [2]. There was a strong feeling in the room > that this draft was a good basis for adoption into the QUIC WG. So we'd like > to start an adoption call. > > The adoption call will run for 2 weeks, ending on February 27 2021 (anywhere > on earth). Please reply to this email with any comments. > > As a reminder, the draft contains two approaches to using packet numbers. The > feeling in the room at IETF 113 was that it is suitable to adopt the > documents in this state and select a single approach as part of the regular > consensus process. > > Since this is a draft that unifies different proposals, the chairs are > suggesting that should the WG agree to adopt draft-lmbdhk-quic-multipath, the > current author group be split into three editors (Mirja, Quentin, Yanmei) > and three authors (Chrisian, Olivier, Yunfei). > > Kinds regards, > Matt & Lucas > QUIC WG Chairs > > > [1] - > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/slides-112-quic-unified-multipath-quic-extension/ > [2] - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lmbdhk-quic-multipath/
