Remove the glossary?

[ekr]

Is this helping?

[davegarrett]

Glossaries are usually a good thing, but pretty much everything in there is either in need of pruning out or is better explained in its relevant section. The HTTP/2 spec just includes a really short glossary of basic terms up top:
https://http2.github.io/http2-spec/index.html#rfc.section.2.2

This seems like a better way to do this.

[davegarrett]

Not sure if this is the best route, but creating a PR for it was quick to do.

[seanturner]

I'm in favor of removing the glossary. I don't think there's any need to explain what AES, DSA, etc. is in this document. Maybe it was needed when it first came out but it's not needed now. The only definition I thought might be needed is application layer/application layer protocol, but if you read s1 (right before where these terms will go) the concepts of layering on top of TLS is explained well enough in my mind. I could see adding a definition for "resumption" though.

[richsalz]

Define resumption in-line with the text when it is first used, maybe. But I like Dave's change.

[seanturner]

I can live with that too. Having it defined will hopefully stop these kind of things:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1363/

[ekr]

Merged.