Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 14:39:12 -0700
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts
 <reply+0166e4ab99f39cf5400632f752b375796ee85b4244d9664392cebac22c8092a169ce19d467b3@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2621/c483428908@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2621@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2621@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] lost_pn can no longer be negative (#2621)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="--==_mimepart_5cb4fa00cee5a_246d3fec788d45c4909d0";
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/AM0qmh5QrHb6BfstR4zznQ7Qvjw>


----==_mimepart_5cb4fa00cee5a_246d3fec788d45c4909d0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I'll note that infinite is not a valid unsigned integer either, so I'm increasingly not in love with the complexity this causes vs just using signed integers.  QUIC only supports 62 bit ints on the wire, so signed integers are not an implementation burden.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2621#issuecomment-483428908
----==_mimepart_5cb4fa00cee5a_246d3fec788d45c4909d0
Content-Type: text/html;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<p>I'll note that infinite is not a valid unsigned integer either, so I'm increasingly not in love with the complexity this causes vs just using signed integers.  QUIC only supports 62 bit ints on the wire, so signed integers are not an implementation burden.</p>

<p style="font-size:small;-webkit-text-size-adjust:none;color:#666;">&mdash;<br />You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.<br />Reply to this email directly, <a href="https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2621#issuecomment-483428908">view it on GitHub</a>, or <a href="https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AWbkq14tI60A2ejTVTH5XkJywXibbcIFks5vhPGAgaJpZM4cwSTm">mute the thread</a>.<img src="https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AWbkqyRmcvXlhEmQAKUvBVMr5Flhc9zqks5vhPGAgaJpZM4cwSTm.gif" height="1" width="1" alt="" /></p>
<script type="application/json" data-scope="inboxmarkup">{"api_version":"1.0","publisher":{"api_key":"05dde50f1d1a384dd78767c55493e4bb","name":"GitHub"},"entity":{"external_key":"github/quicwg/base-drafts","title":"quicwg/base-drafts","subtitle":"GitHub repository","main_image_url":"https://github.githubassets.com/images/email/message_cards/header.png","avatar_image_url":"https://github.githubassets.com/images/email/message_cards/avatar.png","action":{"name":"Open in GitHub","url":"https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts"}},"updates":{"snippets":[{"icon":"PERSON","message":"@ianswett in #2621: I'll note that infinite is not a valid unsigned integer either, so I'm increasingly not in love with the complexity this causes vs just using signed integers.  QUIC only supports 62 bit ints on the wire, so signed integers are not an implementation burden."}],"action":{"name":"View Pull Request","url":"https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2621#issuecomment-483428908"}}}</script>
<script type="application/ld+json">[
{
"@context": "http://schema.org",
"@type": "EmailMessage",
"potentialAction": {
"@type": "ViewAction",
"target": "https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2621#issuecomment-483428908",
"url": "https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2621#issuecomment-483428908",
"name": "View Pull Request"
},
"description": "View this Pull Request on GitHub",
"publisher": {
"@type": "Organization",
"name": "GitHub",
"url": "https://github.com"
}
}
]</script>
----==_mimepart_5cb4fa00cee5a_246d3fec788d45c4909d0--