>> > I hope not. The lines were cut in Vancouver, and > occasions told me that this list is the right place to have the > full discussion. I can confirm this. Indeed, this is just the usual IETF process. We discuss something in meetings, we confirm on the mailing list, we write detailed drafts and debate text. Hopefully the IESG and IAB can support the end result, but the draft should be IETF's (rough) consensus opinion. As always*. Jari *) Well, we can of course publish, e.g., IAB RFCs (which are not necessarily IETF consensus opinions) and have done so in the past. I'm sure we'll see a stream of documents from the IAB on this and other topics in the future. As well. But IETF's opinions are also important, and obviously carry even larger weight. And obviously much of the work on the actual technical changes and new protocols is IETF work (UTA WG, HTTPBIS WG, …)