Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Why ignore MAX_STREAM_DATA or MAX_DATA that don't increase the flow control limits (#2082)

janaiyengar <> Tue, 04 December 2018 01:18 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 440AF130DCE for <>; Mon, 3 Dec 2018 17:18:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.46
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.46 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1.46, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 lNxpyYlMy-V7 for <>; Mon, 3 Dec 2018 17:18:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC119130DBE for <>; Mon, 3 Dec 2018 17:18:37 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2018 17:18:37 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1543886317; bh=/kIvjTPmrF23aiDoqZjk5Ct9wpFwr4ZPo4jqx+1DM8c=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=twiDUkRwaxjYWHfQxbNpRi0y68nKZrKbATIa7WJjrKfBinwI5BlfRDSsO/g2TyI5N 9BN4Uc7UujLh79YFIg/tFDnwKijn7h8DvtJGFmWVw45cekPtO+2WPV1r9V+bieNxay bMNl+v/saG0W2m/zSG0UaVeq4BIsEvOcREXbparY=
From: janaiyengar <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2082/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Why ignore MAX_STREAM_DATA or MAX_DATA that don't increase the flow control limits (#2082)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c05d5ed1185c_75a73ff1ea2d45bc270295"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: janaiyengar
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: Tue, 04 Dec 2018 01:18:39 -0000

@ekr: Is the text you've proposed above your suggested rewording? That's not enough, because it doesn't capture what the sender needs to do when it receives a frame out of order. I'm happy to put together a PR but I'm not sure what you are after.

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