Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Use of "in order" might be misunderstood as an ordering requirement (1) (#4038)
Lars Eggert <notifications@github.com> Thu, 20 August 2020 09:03 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 BA7C83A0A4D for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 02:03:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.009
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.009 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, 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: 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 kbT9Sbr7hGrC for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 02:03:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-24.smtp.github.com (out-24.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.207]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47DAE3A0A40 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 02:03:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-0f7e7fd.ash1-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-0f7e7fd.ash1-iad.github.net [10.56.110.17]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 838D36003DA for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Aug 2020 02:03:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1597914194; bh=O/cV631OkVkmb6PwODcM85d0MurY31pEW0OH/Cs0hDI=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=nKasrpKp4bcMDcMbXu47BOCMe0vtW20fuJMEPOS/gWJTjN2VMc/RGMXqdVWRnN3wx tPgqamLJyi0wzaCiXBC1dJMlj7NDfeg5MsuIBi8ljhUz/9nTrjLA0LzqjJDzfpRg6M ZbiqoF7TSf9fcdgnl/1AEzZrUoCLsO1JMa4Ek5Rg=
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 02:03:14 -0700
From: Lars Eggert <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK76LDGHBZ5KJIIXPB55JIOVFEVBNHHCRLVIPE@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4038/677473766@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4038@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4038@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Use of "in order" might be misunderstood as an ordering requirement (1) (#4038)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5f3e3c5273c32_5e74196455223c"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: larseggert
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/IssB0P8m6l5AIibqFjt1FgXwFzI>
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: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 09:03:17 -0000
FYI, it's more readable to quote with `>`, e.g., > Servers SHOULD be able to read longer connection IDs from other QUIC versions in order to properly form a version negotiation packet. this might be misread as an ordering requirement, but I think is intend to be: > Servers SHOULD be able to read longer connection IDs from other QUIC versions to properly form a version negotiation packet. -- 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/4038#issuecomment-677473766
- [quicwg/base-drafts] Use of "in order" might be m… Gorry Fairhurst
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Use of "in order" might … Lars Eggert
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Use of "in order" might … Martin Thomson