Ecosyste.ms: Issues

An open API service for providing issue and pull request metadata for open source projects.

GitHub / tfpauly/draft-pauly-quic-datagram issues and pull requests

#33 - remind implementors of the "fun" parts of no flow control

Issue - State: closed - Opened by grmocg almost 5 years ago - 1 comment

#32 - Consider retransmission bit leakage

Issue - State: closed - Opened by chris-wood almost 5 years ago - 2 comments

#31 - Change TP from Frame Size to Payload Size

Pull Request - State: closed - Opened by nibanks almost 5 years ago - 1 comment

#30 - Specify Max Payload Size instead of Max Frame Size

Issue - State: closed - Opened by nibanks almost 5 years ago - 3 comments

#29 - Draft 05 defines how many frame types?

Issue - State: closed - Opened by LPardue almost 5 years ago - 1 comment
Labels: editorial

#28 - Editorial changes on congestion control

Pull Request - State: closed - Opened by DavidSchinazi about 5 years ago

#27 - Add GitHub

Pull Request - State: closed - Opened by DavidSchinazi about 5 years ago

#26 - Mention Path MTU

Pull Request - State: closed - Opened by DavidSchinazi about 5 years ago

#25 - Clarify lack of support

Pull Request - State: closed - Opened by DavidSchinazi about 5 years ago

#24 - Clarify interaction with 0-RTT

Pull Request - State: closed - Opened by DavidSchinazi about 5 years ago

#23 - Recommend value for max_datagram_frame_size

Pull Request - State: closed - Opened by DavidSchinazi about 5 years ago

#22 - Clarify loss is not a certainty

Pull Request - State: closed - Opened by DavidSchinazi about 5 years ago

#21 - Make discussion of flow identifiers more vague

Pull Request - State: closed - Opened by DavidSchinazi about 5 years ago

#20 - Allow empty datagrams

Pull Request - State: closed - Opened by DavidSchinazi about 5 years ago

#19 - Specify whether empty DATAGRAM frame are allowed

Issue - State: closed - Opened by DavidSchinazi about 5 years ago - 8 comments

#18 - Make discussion of flow identifiers more vague

Issue - State: closed - Opened by DavidSchinazi about 5 years ago

#17 - Add informational ref to draft-h3-datagram

Pull Request - State: closed - Opened by DavidSchinazi about 5 years ago - 2 comments

#16 - Clarify lost datagram

Issue - State: closed - Opened by mikkelfj about 5 years ago - 3 comments

#14 - 0-RTT clarifications

Issue - State: closed - Opened by rpaulo over 5 years ago - 1 comment

#13 - API considerations for lack of DATAGRAM support

Issue - State: closed - Opened by rpaulo over 5 years ago - 2 comments

#12 - Receiver SHOULD ACK before dropping datagram frames

Issue - State: closed - Opened by goelvidhi over 5 years ago - 2 comments

#11 - Remove flow identifiers based on discussion at IETF 105

Pull Request - State: closed - Opened by tfpauly over 5 years ago - 1 comment

#10 - Datagram flow prioritization

Issue - State: closed - Opened by tfpauly over 5 years ago - 1 comment

#9 - Updates based on prague side meeting feedback

Pull Request - State: closed - Opened by tfpauly over 5 years ago

#8 - Should DATAGRAM frames include some sort of ID field

Issue - State: closed - Opened by erickinnear over 5 years ago - 8 comments

#7 - Flow control for datagram flows

Issue - State: closed - Opened by goelvidhi over 5 years ago - 7 comments
Labels: bug, enhancement

#6 - Allow DATAGRAM frames to be coalesced with any other frame.

Pull Request - State: closed - Opened by rpaulo over 5 years ago

#5 - Congestion control

Issue - State: closed - Opened by DavidSchinazi over 5 years ago - 6 comments

#4 - Section 5 Nit

Issue - State: closed - Opened by tfpauly over 5 years ago

#3 - Should we call DATAGRAM ID -> DATAGRAM FLOW ID?

Issue - State: closed - Opened by tfpauly over 5 years ago - 5 comments

#2 - Explain how max datagram frame size interacts with PTMU

Issue - State: closed - Opened by tfpauly over 5 years ago - 3 comments

#1 - Added datagram identifiers

Pull Request - State: closed - Opened by DavidSchinazi almost 6 years ago