Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] Recovery editorial pass (#2381)

From: ianswett <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 17:26:36 -0800

You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2381

-- Commit Summary --

  * Recovery editorial pass

-- File Changes --

    M draft-ietf-quic-recovery.md (49)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2381.patch
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2381.diff

-- 
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/pull/2381

---

From: Marten Seemann <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 17:37:21 -0800

marten-seemann commented on this pull request.

> @@ -454,10 +456,9 @@ a subsequent connection attempt to the server.
 
 When packet protection keys are discarded (see Section 4.9 of {{QUIC-TLS}}), all
 packets that were sent with those keys can no longer be acknowledged because
-their acknowledgements cannot be processed anymore. The sender considers them no
-longer in flight. That is, the sender SHOULD discard all recovery state
-associated with those packets and MUST remove them from the count of bytes in
-flight.
+their acknowledgements cannot be processed anymore. The sender SHOULD discard
+all recovery state associated with those packets and MUST remove them from

Why is one a SHOULD and the other a MUST?

-- 
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/pull/2381#pullrequestreview-197343179

---

From: ianswett <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 17:48:11 -0800

ianswett commented on this pull request.

Maybe the thought is one could not actually discard the state but instead garbage collect it at a convenient time?

-- 
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/pull/2381#discussion_r251664861

---

From: Marten Seemann <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 17:52:56 -0800

To me having a SHOULD implies that I could also keep the state and act on it.

-- 
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/pull/2381#discussion_r251665668

---

From: ianswett <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 01:59:54 +0000 (UTC)

@ianswett pushed 1 commit.

822ddae20e0dcf3a7648dfc9311290e26eb1e41a  Update draft-ietf-quic-recovery.md

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2381/files/86e889e028cb7064547d9712f65340ffef8904ea..822ddae20e0dcf3a7648dfc9311290e26eb1e41a

---

From: ianswett <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 18:00:03 -0800

Fixed

-- 
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/pull/2381#discussion_r251666891