Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] RFC Editor comment 8 (Issue #4974)

From: Lucas Pardue <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2022 10:40:30 -0700

RFC-to-be 9114 (draft-ietf-quic-http) includes the following note to indicate that the registrations have a status of permanent and the Change Controller is the IETF.  Should a similar statement be included in this document?  

>From RFC-to-be 9114:
   The initial allocations in these registries created in this document
   are all assigned permanent status and list a change controller of the
   IETF and a contact of the HTTP working group ([email-masked]).

In addition, note that the padding in the Settings, Stream Types, and Error Codes differs from what appears in the IANA registry.  IANA included the following note when they notified us that their actions for RFC-to-be 9114 were complete:

   NOTE: In the new registries, the padding has been adjusted for consistency from one
   registry to another and with iana.org/assignments/quic. We understand that there may
   be a request to change it.

We have asked Mike (as editor of RFC-to-be 9114) to review, as the padding for the HTTP/3 registries is now inconsistent with the padding for the HTTP/2 registries.  Please review and dicuss and let us  know if any updates are needed. 

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4974
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/[email-masked]>