From de84fd076035649dc945db787b360e9ba46fab81 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jana Iyengar Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 13:36:19 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Make refs normative --- draft-ietf-quic-recovery.md | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/draft-ietf-quic-recovery.md b/draft-ietf-quic-recovery.md index d8986f4095..64815eb7c2 100644 --- a/draft-ietf-quic-recovery.md +++ b/draft-ietf-quic-recovery.md @@ -883,7 +883,7 @@ exiting the recovery period. Implementations MAY reduce the congestion window immediately upon entering a recovery period or use other mechanisms, such as Proportional Rate Reduction -({{?PRR=RFC6937}}), to reduce the congestion window more gradually. If the +({{!PRR=RFC6937}}), to reduce the congestion window more gradually. If the congestion window is reduced immediately, a single packet can be sent prior to reduction. This speeds up loss recovery if the data in the lost packet is retransmitted and is similar to TCP as described in Section 5 of {{?RFC6675}}. @@ -1086,7 +1086,7 @@ the congestion window SHOULD NOT be increased in either slow start or congestion avoidance. This can happen due to insufficient application data or flow control limits. -A sender MAY use the pipeACK method described in Section 4.3 of {{?RFC7661}} +A sender MAY use the pipeACK method described in Section 4.3 of {{!RFC7661}} to determine if the congestion window is sufficiently utilized. A sender that paces packets (see {{pacing}}) might delay sending packets @@ -1133,8 +1133,8 @@ limits and so no advantage is gained by doing so. Endpoints choose the congestion controller that they use. Congestion controllers respond to reports of ECN-CE by reducing their rate, but the response may vary. -Markings can be treated as equivalent to loss ({{?RFC3168}}), but other -responses can be specified, such as ({{?RFC8511}}) or ({{?RFC8311}}). +Markings can be treated as equivalent to loss ({{!RFC3168}}), but other +responses can be specified, such as ({{!RFC8511}}) or ({{!RFC8311}}). # IANA Considerations