Date: Thu, 04 May 2017 19:18:16 -0700
From: janaiyengar <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts
 <reply+0166e4abb9215060e74e7766c6dd618eb9ebf50de25cceda92cf000000011523a2e892a169ce0d7f5e82@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/505/299355722@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/505@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/505@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Refactor "Packetization and Reliability"
 section (#505)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="--==_mimepart_590be0e8140c1_4be63fd56eb9dc2c27594";
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/Ia8uR3NGS4oHmj-M-EZnRwFufwo>

----==_mimepart_590be0e8140c1_4be63fd56eb9dc2c27594
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

@ekr: Right, sorry, I misspoke. The point was to say that a client should use higher packet sizes only if it's actively doing PMTUD. I wasn't clear in my description.

@martinthomson My intent was different than the words that came out; I don't believe what I just clarified contradicts what we have. I've added a design label and happy to split this issue out into a separate one from the refactor.

-- 
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/issues/505#issuecomment-299355722
----==_mimepart_590be0e8140c1_4be63fd56eb9dc2c27594
Content-Type: text/html;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p><a href=3D"https://github.com/ekr" class=3D"user-mention">@ekr</a>: Righ=
t, sorry, I misspoke. The point was to say that a client should use higher =
packet sizes only if it's actively doing PMTUD. I wasn't clear in my descri=
ption.</p>
<p><a href=3D"https://github.com/martinthomson" class=3D"user-mention">@mar=
tinthomson</a> My intent was different than the words that came out; I don'=
t believe what I just clarified contradicts what we have. I've added a desi=
gn label and happy to split this issue out into a separate one from the ref=
actor.</p>

<p style=3D"font-size:small;-webkit-text-size-adjust:none;color:#666;">&mda=
sh;<br />You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.<=
br />Reply to this email directly, <a href=3D"https://github.com/quicwg/bas=
e-drafts/issues/505#issuecomment-299355722">view it on GitHub</a>, or <a hr=
ef=3D"https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AWbkq0wykoFpiosFztt=
rp9yjFtXNWQfkks5r2obogaJpZM4NRZpv">mute the thread</a>.<img alt=3D"" height=
=3D"1" src=3D"https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AWbkqx0hQpAC-OTfiRhxR=
XeKYZXGQi_wks5r2obogaJpZM4NRZpv.gif" width=3D"1" /></p>
<div itemscope itemtype=3D"http://schema.org/EmailMessage">
<div itemprop=3D"action" itemscope itemtype=3D"http://schema.org/ViewAction=
">
  <link itemprop=3D"url" href=3D"https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issu=
es/505#issuecomment-299355722"></link>
  <meta itemprop=3D"name" content=3D"View Issue"></meta>
</div>
<meta itemprop=3D"description" content=3D"View this Issue on GitHub"></meta>
</div>

<script type=3D"application/json" data-scope=3D"inboxmarkup">{"api_version"=
:"1.0","publisher":{"api_key":"05dde50f1d1a384dd78767c55493e4bb","name":"Gi=
tHub"},"entity":{"external_key":"github/quicwg/base-drafts","title":"quicwg=
/base-drafts","subtitle":"GitHub repository","main_image_url":"https://clou=
d.githubusercontent.com/assets/143418/17495839/a5054eac-5d88-11e6-95fc-7290=
892c7bb5.png","avatar_image_url":"https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/asset=
s/143418/15842166/7c72db34-2c0b-11e6-9aed-b52498112777.png","action":{"name=
":"Open in GitHub","url":"https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts"}},"updates=
":{"snippets":[{"icon":"PERSON","message":"@janaiyengar in #505: @ekr: Righ=
t, sorry, I misspoke. The point was to say that a client should use higher =
packet sizes only if it's actively doing PMTUD. I wasn't clear in my descri=
ption.\r\n\r\n@martinthomson My intent was different than the words that ca=
me out; I don't believe what I just clarified contradicts what we have. I'v=
e added a design label and happy to split this issue out into a separate on=
e from the refactor."}],"action":{"name":"View Issue","url":"https://github=
.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/505#issuecomment-299355722"}}}</script>=

----==_mimepart_590be0e8140c1_4be63fd56eb9dc2c27594--