Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Explain asymmetric confirmation condition (#2881)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Sun, 21 July 2019 13:38 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@github.com>
X-Original-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D996812011E for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Jul 2019 06:38:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.382
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.382 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=github.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MTJZu3WWXVzN for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Jul 2019 06:38:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-6.smtp.github.com (out-6.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.197]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E457012004E for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 Jul 2019 06:38:49 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 06:38:48 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1563716328; bh=aCvqY/At2jjtnxuQMeca9XAWPNhNH890MxGHgK2+BKI=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=Aw5HKQMPt3nCRSMGgYBgIN1XVBpQZW6jA/YN5JZ0KylG1rQBdI78JHv/icJc4UuZS ccL0jFtW3tODjtPh0LzLwGMtjcwcqwMzETz7edDkPYoJ1/2d67TLs1if+nuJ2Agzzw scnx+txH0/J5SbTXkKrJ2vR1Y6xEl+xFeI+VbBUE=
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJKYWSENQNFNOGIAOARF3IGOWREVBNHHBXQFRGE@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2881/review/264537623@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2881@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2881@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Explain asymmetric confirmation condition (#2881)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d346ae8cb4d1_55963f85f86cd960117752"; 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
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/IIMU3bx1QORQgrH30ZTLi3ZvvOU>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <quic-issues.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic-issues/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic-issues@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2019 13:38:52 -0000

ianswett commented on this pull request.



> @@ -629,6 +629,14 @@ MAY use alternate strategies for determining the content of probe packets,
 including sending new or retransmitted data based on the application's
 priorities.
 
+If the handshake is complete, but not confirmed (see Section 4.1.1 and Section

Also, now that I read the existing text again, I'm wondering if the "Sending Probe Packets" section should be before "Handshakes and New Paths"?

-- 
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/2881#discussion_r305618565