Subject: [Doh] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on charter-ietf-doh-00-12: (with COMMENT)

From: Eric Rescorla <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 20:11:03 -0700

Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-doh-00-12: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-doh/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think this new text about JS is going in the right direction, but perhaps it
straddles the line too much.

Say that -- contra the text here -- we discovered some respect in which it was
more convenient to design the protocol in a way that made JS break. Would the
charter require us not to do that? I think the answer is "no", but I just want
to verify that.

---

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 22:22:47 -0500

> charter require us not to do that? I think the answer is "no", but I just want

The charter would allow that. I suspect that there's a good chance that 
WG consensus wouldn't fall in line with a proposal to do so, but I think 
that the WG is the right group of people to make such a decision.

/a