Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Server's first flight should be capped by INITCWND (#3639)

ianswett <> Wed, 13 May 2020 13:10 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DC473A0B19 for <>; Wed, 13 May 2020 06:10:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.181
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.181 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.173, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wVzhfpv52QR4 for <>; Wed, 13 May 2020 06:10:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 099603A0B1E for <>; Wed, 13 May 2020 06:10:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F1CB8C00DB for <>; Wed, 13 May 2020 06:10:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1589375452; bh=jN9K9LgBLcjkadsege/XJWbTfTtcJFp2gU2yLgyW8Lo=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=kq+tKVkRQsrbr3LUH5RvmYs9SB7YBC7mCZdKz27EfIwUkPRXLBF7URVF5HfKzDX5a 6V5ap2ND7RVlE8ABUZi8KvePVL6vxDr1euTq+k93wlI/xJ6sUDAeIF9ZrrcDelbzT1 YBhCBZzGrUIhf6duOEDVqX9fwlH4YYu6NmSVm5uE=
Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 06:10:52 -0700
From: ianswett <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3639/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Server's first flight should be capped by INITCWND (#3639)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5ebbf1dc2b151_170b3fd2576cd9642094f"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ianswett
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 13:10:55 -0000

At the editor's meeting, we concluded that the pseudocode did not represent the current text about re-arming the PTO alarm.  I merged the first PR because I think it's a nice clarification and I'll send out a PR for the pseudocode.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: