issues
search
tsvwg
/
draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-options
1
stars
0
forks
source link
issues
Newest
Newest
Most commented
Recently updated
Oldest
Least commented
Least recently updated
Typo in draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-options-23 Section 9.1
#19
Mike-Heard
closed
1 year ago
2
Add design principles per IETF 117 slide deck
#18
jtouch
closed
8 months ago
4
Could we avoid being judgmental about design of middleboxes?
#17
gorryfair
closed
1 year ago
8
* Section 9.4: Should new codes be defined for ICMPv4 and ICMPv6 Time Exceeded messages to indicate UDP reassembly failures?
#16
Mike-Heard
closed
12 months ago
18
* Section 22: Specify that RES may be sent other than on return traffic only when DLPMTUD is enabled.
#15
Mike-Heard
closed
12 months ago
10
* Section 9.7: Specify that RES echoes the token in the most recently receive REQ
#14
Mike-Heard
closed
12 months ago
16
* Section 9.6: Change "segment" to "datagram"
#13
Mike-Heard
closed
1 year ago
6
* Section 7: should OCS be mandatory under circumstances other than UDP CS <> 0?
#12
Mike-Heard
closed
12 months ago
37
* Section 22: should compare TCP and UDP
#11
gorryfair
closed
1 year ago
2
* Section 12: The inner if clauses in the pseudo-code seem to be inconsistent
#10
gorryfair
closed
12 months ago
12
Consistent use of ">>" as a marker
#9
gorryfair
closed
12 months ago
11
* Section 22: Mention potential for privacy exposure
#8
gorryfair
closed
12 months ago
11
* Section 16: rename section?
#7
gorryfair
closed
1 year ago
7
* Section 10.1: UENC downref?
#6
gorryfair
closed
8 months ago
4
Section 9.9: Is AUTH sufficiently mature for LC as PS?
#5
gorryfair
closed
8 months ago
5
* Section 9.8: Resolution of discussion on timestamp RTT processing.
#4
gorryfair
closed
12 months ago
13
* Section 9.4: Agreed text for the (simplest) way to handle options in fragments of a datagram.
#3
gorryfair
closed
1 year ago
9
Suggestion for reduced RDOS text
#2
gorryfair
closed
1 year ago
6
Clarification Request for non-terminal fragments
#1
gorryfair
closed
1 year ago
4
Previous