Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Editorial: More concise intro text (recovery) (#3380)

Martin Thomson <> Tue, 11 February 2020 23:45 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9637120839 for <>; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:45:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.999 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_32=0.001, 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: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J01030I_c7uE for <>; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:45:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4202412004C for <>; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:45:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92DFC6E13B8 for <>; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:45:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1581464732; bh=/hXQ4PcwQbiwbmrz5LLU9/0VuCY5RuaTmrlIs4d/1Rg=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=b1wr/Mugaa50VVnN38V417yHA/Ago96/vUFV7ZLoJd1tzk6VJkYW9dfK0VC1YByE9 paJ5CrOVTIXPx7xARk/pxXk9hr3Yk2em/K1wb5UXQdt40EDPaG1OuRKxVKPRqRJUsq L+jHDEHPhU5tVOaifUds27gVZyDFVB7WI+w2LF1s=
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:45:32 -0800
From: Martin Thomson <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3380/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Editorial: More concise intro text (recovery) (#3380)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e433c9c83b78_7a6b3fdd364cd9682713c7"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: martinthomson
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, 11 Feb 2020 23:45:36 -0000

martinthomson commented on this pull request.

> -of transport and security experience, and implements mechanisms that make it
-attractive as a modern general-purpose transport.  The QUIC protocol is
-described in {{QUIC-TRANSPORT}}.
-QUIC implements the spirit of existing TCP congestion control and loss recovery
-mechanisms, described in RFCs, various Internet-drafts, and also those prevalent
-in the Linux TCP implementation.  This document describes QUIC congestion
-control and loss recovery, and where applicable, attributes the TCP equivalent
-in RFCs, Internet-drafts, academic papers, and/or TCP implementations.
+QUIC is a new multiplexed and secure transport protocol atop UDP, specified in
+{{QUIC-TRANSPORT}}. This document describes congestion control and loss
+recovery for QUIC. Mechanisms described in this document follow the spirit
+of existing TCP congestion control and loss recovery mechanisms, described in
+RFCs, various Internet-drafts, or academic papers, and also those prevalent in
+the Linux TCP implementation.

Do we need to privilege Linux, or can we simply say "TCP implementations"?

TCP implementations.

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