Second set of editorial nits #3770
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
@gorryfair had some useful feedback in #3735. This doesn't address the following items as numbered in the issue: (2) Because the fix to (1) seems adequate by my reckoning. That addresses the question of considering the impact on other network users. (6) This doesn't appear to be a problem. It might be a formatting issue, with the URL not appearing. (7) This is addressed in the recent draft by adding [Section 10.2.2](https://quicwg.org/base-drafts/draft-ietf-quic-transport.html#name-deferring-idle-timeout) (9) and (11) I can't find the rendering glitch mentioned. The rest of these are good. Closes #3735.
martinthomson
added
the
editorial
gorryfair
reviewed
Jun 17, 2020
draft-ietf-quic-transport.md
Outdated
| @@ -3551,7 +3553,7 @@ too large. A receiver can discard unacknowledged ACK Ranges to limit ACK frame | |||
| size, at the cost of increased retransmissions from the sender. This is | |||
| necessary if an ACK frame would be too large to fit in a packet, however | |||
| receivers MAY also limit ACK frame size further to preserve space for other | |||
| frames. | |||
| frames or to limit the bandwidth that acknowledgments consume. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is /bandwidth/capacity/ ?
|
Fine and thanks for looking to these. I do think something more needs to be said about the need to avoid collateral impact on the forward traffic of this and other traffic sharing a path. To me this really important in an IETF Transport specification, especially one that might displace TCP. To me, a note to make sure this isn't ignored would seem enough, but I'd be happy to take this up as a separate WGLC comment if that seems better. |
|
Let's take that up separately. I don't object to the language, but I just didn't know what to say. |
janaiyengar
approved these changes
Jun 18, 2020
Co-authored-by: Jana Iyengar <jri.ietf@gmail.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
@gorryfair had some useful feedback in #3735.
This doesn't address the following items as numbered in the issue:
(2) Because the fix to (1) seems adequate by my reckoning. That
addresses the question of considering the impact on other network users.
(6) This doesn't appear to be a problem. It might be a formatting
issue, with the URL not appearing.
(7) This is addressed in the recent draft by adding Section
10.2.2
(9) and (11) I can't find the rendering glitch mentioned.
The rest of these are good.
Closes #3735.