Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
137 lines (85 loc) · 7.01 KB

CONTRIBUTING.md

File metadata and controls

137 lines (85 loc) · 7.01 KB
Raw

Contributing to QUIC

Before submitting feedback, please familiarize yourself with our current issues list(s). If you're new to this, you may also want to read the Tao of the IETF.

Be aware that all contributions fall under the "NOTE WELL" terms outlined below.

Following Discussion

The Working Group has a few venues for discussion:

  • We plain to meet at all IETF meetings for the foreseeable future, and hold interim meetings between them, at least through 2017. See our meeting materials repository and the official proceedings.

  • Our mailing list is used for most communication, including notifications of meetings, new drafts, consensus calls and other business, as well as issue discussion.

  • We also discuss specific issues on the appropriate issues list in Github. If you don't want to use Github to follow these discussions, you can subscribe to the issue announce list.

To be active in the Working Group, you can participate in any of these places. Most activity takes place on the mailing list, but if you just want to comment on and raise issues, that's fine too.

Raising Issues

We use our Github issues lists to track items for discussion and their resolution.

Before filing a new issue, please consider a few things:

  • Issues should be just that; issues with our deliverables, not questions or support requests.
  • Please review the issues list to make sure that you aren't filing a duplicate.
  • If you're not sure how to phrase your issue, please ask on the mailing list.

Issues can also be raised on the Working Group mailing list by clearly marking them as such (e.g., "New Issue" in the Subject: line).

Be aware that issues might be rephrased, changed in scope, or combined with others, so that the group can focus its efforts. If you feel that such a change loses an important part of your original issue, please bring it up, either in comments or on the list.

Off-topic and duplicate issues will be closed without discussion. Note that comments on individual commits will only be responded to with best effort, and may not be seen.

Resolving Issues

The open issues in the issues list are those that we are currently or plan to discuss. When an issue is closed, it implies that the group has consensus and it is reflected in the draft(s). If substantive new information is brought to our attention, issues can be reopened by the Chairs.

Issues will be labeled by the Chairs as either editorial or design.

  • Design issues require discussion and consensus in the Working Group. This discussion can happen both in the issue and on the Working Group mailing list, as outlined below.

  • Editorial issues can be closed by the editor(s) without consensus or notification. Typically, any discussion will take place on the issue itself.

Consensus for the resolution of a design issue can be established in a few different ways:

  • Through discussion on the mailing list. Once a resolution is found, it will be recorded in the issue.

  • Through discussion on the issues list. Once a resolution is found, it will be confirmed on the mailing list before consensus is declared.

The editors can also propose resolutions for the group's consideration by incorporating them into the draft(s); when doing so, the issue should not be closed until consensus is declared.

Issues that have consensus but which aren't yet reflected in text will be labelled as editor-ready. After the editors have incorporated a resolution into the specification, the issue can be closed.

When a new draft is published, the design issues that have been closed since the last draft will be highlighted on the mailing list, to aid reviewers.

Discretionary Design Issue Labels

We also use the following labels to help understand the state of our design issues:

  • Needs Discussion: The issue needs significant Working Group discussion before it can progress.
  • Confirm Consensus: There is a resolution that the proponents believe reflects a consensus position, needs to be confirmed with the WG.
  • Notify Consensus: The WG has achieved consensus in a meeting, needs to be confirmed on the mailing list.

Pull Requests

We welcome pull requests, both for editorial suggestions and to resolve open issues. In the latter case, please identify the relevant issue.

Please do not use a pull request to open a new design issue; it may not be noticed.

Code of Conduct

The IETF Guidelines for Conduct applies to all Working Group communications and meetings.

NOTE WELL

Any submission to the IETF intended by the Contributor for publication as all or part of an IETF Internet-Draft or RFC and any statement made within the context of an IETF activity is considered an "IETF Contribution". Such statements include oral statements in IETF sessions, as well as written and electronic communications made at any time or place, which are addressed to:

  • The IETF plenary session
  • The IESG, or any member thereof on behalf of the IESG
  • Any IETF mailing list, including the IETF list itself, any working group or design team list, or any other list functioning under IETF auspices
  • Any IETF working group or portion thereof
  • Any Birds of a Feather (BOF) session
  • The IAB or any member thereof on behalf of the IAB
  • The RFC Editor or the Internet-Drafts function
  • All IETF Contributions are subject to the rules of RFC 5378 and RFC 3979 (updated by RFC 4879).

Statements made outside of an IETF session, mailing list or other function, that are clearly not intended to be input to an IETF activity, group or function, are not IETF Contributions in the context of this notice.

Please consult RFC 5378 and RFC 3979 for details.

A participant in any IETF activity is deemed to accept all IETF rules of process, as documented in Best Current Practices RFCs and IESG Statements.

A participant in any IETF activity acknowledges that written, audio and video records of meetings may be made and may be available to the public.