Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] Minor editorial fix (#3710)

From: Jana Iyengar <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2020 16:55:38 -0700

Closes #3707.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3710

-- Commit Summary --

  * Minor editorial fix

-- File Changes --

    M draft-ietf-quic-recovery.md (18)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3710.patch
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3710.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/3710

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2020 18:00:05 -0700

@martinthomson requested changes on this pull request.

This is the easy bit.  The hard bit is updating all the manual cross references to sections of -recovery...

-- 
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/3710#pullrequestreview-422275368

---

From: Jana Iyengar <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2020 23:40:44 -0700

Yeah, I know, I was going to do that separately. But fair enough. I'll get that in tomorrow.

-- 
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/3710#issuecomment-637311789

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2020 22:02:39 -0700

There don't appear to be too many to fix up:

```
$ egrep -n 'Section [4-9](\.[0-9]*)? of {{QUIC-REC' *.md
draft-ietf-quic-transport.md:1828:(PTO, see Section 5.3 of {{QUIC-RECOVERY}}). Specifically, the client MUST send
draft-ietf-quic-transport.md:2396:This timer SHOULD be set as described in Section 5.3 of {{QUIC-RECOVERY}} and
draft-ietf-quic-transport.md:2670:time out soon, such as within a PTO; see Section 6.6 of {{QUIC-RECOVERY}}.
draft-ietf-quic-transport.md:3445:Section 6 of {{QUIC-RECOVERY}}, rely on acknowledgments to manage their
draft-ietf-quic-transport.md:4380:control state; see Section 6.5 of {{QUIC-RECOVERY}}.
```

This seems to cover 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/3710#issuecomment-638603822

---

From: Jana Iyengar <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2020 01:28:00 -0700

@janaiyengar pushed 1 commit.

1bc34aa8776c1817a60c51073af24d48e4ed8b10  fix references

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3710/files/7b0ad776a5d04ea9acca5dd783011929857cb74a..1bc34aa8776c1817a60c51073af24d48e4ed8b10

---

From: Jana Iyengar <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2020 01:29:11 -0700

Ok, I think I got them all. Some of the references were broken, so fixed them.

-- 
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/3710#issuecomment-639337208

---

From: Jana Iyengar <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2020 01:36:12 -0700

f238f3c17ec6e1c43a5d140f825f449948affd31  Section Section

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3710/files/1bc34aa8776c1817a60c51073af24d48e4ed8b10..f238f3c17ec6e1c43a5d140f825f449948affd31

---

From: Lars Eggert <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2020 01:46:23 -0700

Could I ask why you are not giving section headers IDs (via `{#id}`)? When you then use `{{id}}` in the text, it turns into `Section 1` (if you gave that section that ID.)

-- 
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/3710#issuecomment-639346557

---

From: Jana Iyengar <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2020 01:53:46 -0700

@lars: that works within the document, it doesn't work across documents. These references are in transport for sections in recovery.

-- 
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/3710#issuecomment-639350094

---

From: Lars Eggert <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2020 02:40:18 -0700

Ahh.

-- 
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/3710#issuecomment-639372156

---

From: Mike Bishop <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2020 08:02:38 -0700

https://github.com/cabo/kramdown-rfc2629/issues/57 tracks a feature request to support cross-document references with similar syntax, but it's challenging.

-- 
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/3710#issuecomment-639550382

---

From: ianswett <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2020 13:12:03 -0700

@ianswett approved this pull request.

Thanks Jana, LG.

Can you update the PR title and/or description to be a bit more descriptive?

-- 
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/3710#pullrequestreview-426583557

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2020 19:01:46 -0700

@martinthomson approved this pull request.

> @@ -1824,10 +1824,10 @@ could occur when the server reaches its anti-amplification limit and the client
 has received acknowledgements for all the data it has sent.  In this case, when
 the client has no reason to send additional packets, the server will be unable
 to send more data because it has not validated the client's address. To prevent
-this deadlock, clients MUST send a packet on a probe timeout
-(PTO, see Section 5.3 of {{QUIC-RECOVERY}}). Specifically, the client MUST send
-an Initial packet in a UDP datagram of at least 1200 bytes if it does not have
-Handshake keys, and otherwise send a Handshake packet.
+this deadlock, clients MUST send a packet on a probe timeout (PTO, see Section
+6.2 of {{QUIC-RECOVERY}}). Specifically, the client MUST send an Initial packet

Nice extra fix here.

-- 
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/3710#pullrequestreview-426738025

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2020 19:01:53 -0700

Merged #3710 into master.

-- 
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/3710#event-3422693463