The Tao of IETF still mentions:
"We reject kings, presidents and voting. We believe in rough consensus and running code"
http://www.ietf.org/tao.html
Maybe it's just me, but might it apply here ?
Before the httpbis working group started looking at proposals for HTTP/2.0 SPDY was already implemented and deployed in the field by mutliple browser vendors, library builders for servers and several large websites. A bunch of research documents was written. And a protocol specification document draft existed. SPDY wasn't created in the open perse, but it was iterated with the help the community.
So the IETF WG let people suggest proposals:
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/...
And then they voted.
SPDY got selected.
Also the SPDY draft was used as a basis for writing the new HTTP/2.0 draft.
Is anyone surprised ?
There might fundamental parts of the protocol which might have turned out differently if they would have gone through a open collaborative process.
But at first glace it doesn't look that bad.
I can see the appeal of rubberstamping what already exists.