Ballot for charter-ietf-oarh
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 00-00 and is now closed.
Ballot question: "Do we approve of this charter?"
[comment] * "OARH" is used in the text without expansion of the acronym (though it expanded elsewhere and perhaps doesn't need to be repeated).
For the record: this is the draft charter for what was called OHTTP wg. The name change was announced: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ohttp/AaeAF5TbYaUx94BFu3E2p6AwnvQ/ This is why the OARH charter is now up for approval, as it had already clear previous phases of the chartering process under the OHTTP name (see history here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-ohttp/history/)
There's nothing wrong with OARH, but OHAI clearly has more pizzaz!
The charter text still uses "Oblivious HTTP protocol", should this be updated due to the discussions around the name change?
Thanks for the updates across the charter rename; they look good. I'm interested in the response to Zahed's remark, but will watch that space to see it. Applications and use cases best suited for the Oblivious HTTP protocol are those that have discrete, transactional queries that might reveal small amounts of information over time. Maybe "that each reveal small amounts of information, that might accumulate over time"?
The charter is still missing milestones.
I got a good submission from the peanut gallery that this should be Oblivious HTTP Application Intermediaries (OHAI). As a more pronounceable acronym, I like it, but will leave the suggestion with the proponents.