[quicwg/base-drafts] Alarm vs. timeout (#1383)
Rui Paulo <notifications@github.com> Wed, 23 May 2018 18:12 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 620C01276AF for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 May 2018 11:12:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.01
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] 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 V89z-1eixyLN for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 May 2018 11:12:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-9.smtp.github.com (out-9.smtp.github.com [192.30.254.192]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 284C11270A3 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 May 2018 11:12:53 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 11:12:52 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1527099172; bh=mqAs3dWOKR8uiHcdRug28d3MgoXKKRknEpFDJIXKVMg=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=11MDYLtgEx/QHRG5v2urniA66FQL0kv1A+ro3QMxpC+EwvrSj1PiYmwVfXnEt0pME V3WXCgKB62CEU84HYbgZn7NFGgPWbUiaAn825j8AWDHq/s+SmSx+OUkf59OfjFQm/B tziFgC9qsYTO29Xk0Eur1H2Jp1Jfbxdr6Qblr+Jw=
From: Rui Paulo <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab94ea8296d308782e2c2ba0b5d7dbdf417fb833e892cf00000001171d712492a169ce136b963d@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1383@github.com>
Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] Alarm vs. timeout (#1383)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5b05af24640bc_5a853fb277ceef781975fa"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: rpaulo
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/T0lEAnAfJrQXqqPM3RG8Z7rjEO8>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 23 May 2018 18:12:55 -0000
Do we want to mix 'alarm' and 'timeout' in the transport doc or do we want to use exclusively 'timeout' ? Up to -10 the word 'alarm' was not used. This also applies to the upcoming stream 0 design proposal. -- 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/1383