Hi, I opened the following three issues to track the discussion/resolutions on these comments:
On 2020-9-21, at 20:53, Gorry Fairhurst <[email protected]> wrote: > (i) I suggest the introduction for this spec starts abruptly. Is it worth > considering one sentence top explain what QUIC is, in case someone read this > document first? - One possible solution could be to move the text in section > 3 to section 1? (To me, the section 3 text does not need to come after the > Section 2 definitions.) https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4118 > > (ii) Does this read better with /for/ moved within the sentence? > OLD:/At the endpoint, the connection ID is used to identify which QUIC > connection the packet is intended for./ > NEW:/At the endpoint, the connection ID is used to identify the QUIC > connection for which the packet is intended./ https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4119 > (iii) I see the desire to emphasise the “NOT”, but I query if this is correct > usage of a RFC2119 keyword in Appendix A?: > /The following statements are NOT guaranteed to be true for every QUIC > version:/ https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4120 Thanks, Lars
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
