Recent trouble with QUIC?

Mon Sep 28 03:20:06 UTC 2015

On 27 September 2015 at 18:38, Lyle Giese <lyle at lcrcomputer.net> wrote:

> Part of freedom is to minimize the harm and I think that is where the
> parties replying to this thread diverge.  A broken change that causes harm
> should have/could have been tested better before releasing it to the public
> on the Internet.
>
> Or if a bad release is let loose on the Internet, how does Google minimize
> the harm?

How would this be any different by google introducing TCP related
issue in their frontend servers? This is not a protocol issue, this is
QA issue that could impact arbitrary technology. I'd like to say I've
not broken stuff by misunderstanding impact of my changes, but
unfortunately I can't.

-- 
  ++ytti