Shepherd Writeup for QUIC “base drafts”
This publication requests covers the following I-Ds that together define
the QUIC protocol:
- QUIC: A UDP-Based Multiplexed and Secure Transport,
- QUIC Loss Detection and Congestion Control,
- Using TLS to Secure QUIC, draft-ietf-quic-tls-31
- Version-Independent Properties of QUIC,
- Hypertext Transfer Protocol Version 3 (HTTP/3),
- QPACK: Header Compression for HTTP/3, draft-ietf-quic-qpack-18
All of these I-Ds are intended to become Proposed Standard RFCs, and
that intended status is indicated in their respective title page
2. Document Announcement Write-Up
QUIC is a standards-track, UDP-based, stream-multiplexing, encrypted
transport protocol. Its main features are minimizing connection
establishment and overall transport latency for applications such as
HTTP/3, providing multiplexing without head-of-line blocking, requiring
only changes to path endpoints to enable deployment, providing
always-secure transport using TLS 1.3.
This document set specifies the QUIC transport protocol and it
version-independent invariants, its loss detection and recovery
approach, its use of TLS1.3 for providing security, and a new version of
HTTP that uses QUIC (HTTP/3), along with QPACK for header compression in
Working Group Summary:
As can be expected, discussion on many aspects of QUIC was quite
intense. The resulting consensus, however, was judged by the chairs to
be both strong and broad.
There are over twenty implementations of QUIC that are participating in
interop testing, including all major web browsers and many server, CDN
and standalone library implementations.
The acknowledgements sections of the I-Ds highlight the individuals that
made major contributions to a given document.
The document shepherds for the individual I-Ds are:
- Lucas Pardue:
- Lars Eggert:
- Mark Nottingham:
The responsible AD for the document set is Magnus Westerlund.
3. Document Shepherd Review
The document shepherds extensively reviewed the documents before this
4. Document Shepherd Review Concerns
The document shepherds have no concerns about the depth or breadth of
the reviews for these documents.
5. Broader Reviews
Parts of the document set benefited from specialized reviews from the
TLS, HTTP and transport IETF communities.
6. Document Shepherd General Concerns
The document shepherds have no general concerns about these documents.
7. IPR Disclosure Obligation
The editors of the I-Ds have all declared that they have filed any and
all appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
8. Filed IPR Disclosures
draft-ietf-quic-recovery has had an IPR disclosure filed on it. No
resulting technical changes were argued for.
9. Strength of Consensus
The consensus behind the document set is very strong, also as evidenced
by the substantial number of existing implementations.
The WG last calls were forwarded to the TLS and HTTP WGs, due to the
No discontent was voiced.
11. Document Nits
The IDNits tool does not appear to be functioning correctly, both
locally and using the Web service, so it’s difficult to ascertain
whether its results are accurate (there are many “Failure fetching the
file, proceeding without it.” errors).
12. Formal Review Criteria
No formal review requirements are applicable to this document set.
13. Split References
All references within this document set have been identified as either
normative or informative.
14. Normative References
The document set contains the following normative references to I-Ds:
All of these are on track for timely publication in their respective
15. Downward References
The TLS document has the following downrefs: * RFC8439 (CHACHA) * AES
16. RFC Status Changes
Publication of this document set will not change the status of any
17. IANA Considerations Review
The IANA considerations of the document set have been reviewed and no
issues were identified.
18. New “Expert Review” Registries
The document set defines several IANA registries that allow for
“Provisional Registrations” and “Permanent Registrations”, which both
require Expert review. The IESG should select subject matter experts for
these registration types; candidates include the document editors and
the individuals named as contributors in the acknowledgment sections.
19. Validation of Formal Language Parts
No formal code exists in the document set. draft-ietf-quic-transport,
draft-ietf-quic-recovery and draft-ietf-quic-qpack contain python-like
pseudo code, but not at a level of detail that would lend itself to
The document set does not contain a YANG model.