make doq transport settings more consistent with RFC #1682
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1682 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 78.84% 79.87% +1.03%
==========================================
Files 182 184 +2
Lines 18824 18606 -218
==========================================
+ Hits 14840 14860 +20
+ Misses 3984 3746 -238 |
bluejekyll
force-pushed
the
better-doq-rfc-compliance
branch
from
a983bf3
to
3d4511b
Compare
bluejekyll
force-pushed
the
better-doq-rfc-compliance
branch
from
3d4511b
to
85a4faf
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I'm trying to debug issues with DoQ and some servers out there, but can't get to the root yet. These changes are things that appear to differ from RFC and some inconsistency between the client and server.
related: #1687