source: wg_materials/interim0113/agenda.txt @ 2155

Last change on this file since 2155 was 2155, checked in by mnot@…, 8 years ago

update with detailed schedule

File size: 3.3 KB
Line 
1Agenda - HTTPbis Interim Meeting
2================================
3
4Tokyo, Japan  January 30-February 1, 2013
5
6[Arrangements](http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/wiki/F2F/Jan13)
7[Issues List](http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/report/21)
8[Current Draft](http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-http2)
9
10### WEDNESDAY, January 30, 2013
11
12    0830-0900 Reception
13    0900-1200 Morning Session
14    1200-1300 Lunch - En Cafe
15    1300-1500 Afternoon Session I
16    1500-1530 Break
17    1530-1700 Afternoon Session II
18    1700 Announcement (e.g. How to get out of building)
19
20### THURSDAY, January 31, 2013
21
22    0830-0900 Reception
23    0900-1200 Morning Session
24    1200-1300 Lunch - En Cafe
25    1300-1500 Afternoon Session I
26    1500-1530 Break
27    1530-1700 Afternoon Session II
28
29### FRIDAY, February 1, 2013
30
31    0830-0900 Reception
32    0900-1300 Session
33    1300-1400 Lunch - En Cafe
34
35
36
37Introduction
38------------
39
40- Blue sheets
41- Scribe selection
42- NOTE WELL
43- Meeting format, goals
44- Agenda bashing
45
46
47HTTP/2 Draft Status
48-------------------
49
50The editors (Alexey and Martin) will summarise their current status and
51plans for editorial work.
52
53
54HTTP/2 Issues
55-------------
56
57### Upgrade
58
59We've delegated TLS upgrade to the TLSWG, and have a plan of action for
60HTTP to use the Upgrade mechanism defined by HTTP/1.1, possibly augmented
61by hints in DNS and response headers.
62
63We currently have a proposal for the details of the upgrade, as well as a
64DNS hint proposal. Discussion will focus around these.
65
66- http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-montenegro-httpbis-http2-negotiation
67- http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lear-httpbis-svcinfo-rr
68
69
70### Header Compression
71
72SPDY3's header compression has an identified security issue, so we've
73been evaluating potential alternatives. Discussion will centre around the
74specifics of these proposals, the criteria we'll use for selecting one, and
75the general approach that HTTP/2 takes to header compression.
76
77- http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rpeon-httpbis-header-compression
78- http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-snell-httpbis-bohe
79- http://http2.github.com/http_samples/mnot/
80- [Presentation from James Snell](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1x8GvY-7FJi57DW9vSvjTF1QnTkzM18mXi_LQUUprZeo/view)
81
82### Flow Control
83
84We'll discuss Gabriel's draft of general principles for flow control, and
85how best to reflect it in the draft.
86
87- http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-montenegro-httpbis-http2-fc-principles
88
89
90### Frame Sizes
91
92SDPY3 has a data frame with a maximum size of 16MB. Some implementers have
93mentioned that this limits the use of sendfile() with large files; we'll
94discuss whether to include a "jumbo" frame size (as well as other sizes,
95depending on their use cases).
96
97
98### Prioritisation
99
100We'll start discussion of the prioritisation mechanism, with the aim of
101identifying specific issues and/or changes to make.
102
103[Presentation by Will Chan](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1OfgPJsW6P7pky5PiyEzBNZnf5dWXq-y19ReSSg6BIeM/edit#slide=id.p)
104
105### Other Issues and Deliverables
106
107Discussion of other potential issues (editorial or design), additional
108deliverables, etc.
109
110
111Implementation and Testing
112--------------------------
113
114Based upon the progress we make (or fail to), we'll attempt to sketch out
115a plan for proofs-of-concept, implementation and interoperability testing.
116
117
118Wrap-up
119-------
120
121- Review of Action Items
122- Next Steps
Note: See TracBrowser for help on using the repository browser.