Code change:
state (see HeaderBlock); similarly DATA frames MUST be counted toward the connection flow control window. <del> The GTFO frame does not define any flags. </del> <ins> The GOAWAY frame does not define any flags. </ins> <del> The GTFO frame applies to the connection, not a specific stream.  An endpoint MUST treat a </del> <ins> The GOAWAY frame applies to the connection, not a specific stream. An endpoint MUST treat a </ins> frame with a stream identifier other than 0x0 as a ConnectionErrorHandler of type . <del> The last stream identifier ("Last-Stream-ID") in the GTFO frame contains the highest numbered stream identifier for which the sender of the GTFO frame has received frames on and might have taken some action on.  All streams up to and including the identified stream might have been processed in some way.  The last stream identifier is set to 0 if no streams were processed. </del> <ins> The last stream identifier in the GOAWAY frame contains the highest numbered stream identifier for which the sender of the GOAWAY frame has received frames on and might have taken some action on.  All streams up to and including the identified stream might have been processed in some way.  The last stream identifier is set to 0 if no streams were processed. </ins> Note: In this case, "processed" means that some data from the stream was passed to some higher layer of software that might have taken some action as a result. <del> If a connection terminates without a GTFO frame, this value is </del> <ins> If a connection terminates without a GOAWAY frame, this value is </ins> effectively the highest stream identifier. On streams with lower or equal numbered identifiers that were not

Related discussion:
text: GTFO, as a word, is harmless to implementation for reasons including the opcode is the same. IOTW, the binary representation is the same. There's no technical reason why it matters. I am one of the implementors of this specification. When the change was suggested towards GTFO, I felt motivated I mean the audience of this spec are implementors, some of which may be uptight about crassness others less so. If you look at github (ps this is on github) there's ample evidence that implementors are motivated by words that aren't boring. For example, there's a popular package manager called "fpm". Guess what that stands for? I'm not saying go back and re-word everything to be fresh, rather have patience with those who are literally implementing this, in open source, and are ok with the choice. Expect many more implementors to arise from github, a place relatively unburdened by crass-ness or location.
NAME I'll split the answer to 2 sections. AWAY vs. Out -- AWAY implies a certain longish physical distance, whereas Out seems to imply just "out". AWAY vs "General Termination of Future Operations" -- obviously the second is much more clear and descriptive.
GTFO would be my vote. No future operations, full connection termination, it describes the action best.
NAME if you feel strongly, mail on this thread as not everyone there are on github to see your pov URL
NAME - will do, thanks. I need to dig my W3C mailing list info; haven't used it in years. Cheers!
From the W3C mailing list: Thanks, NAME :) Cheers!
All made points aside, I couldn't find a very important one; to me actually being the most important. If you think about what "Get Out!" could also mean (the offensive TF part is actually interchangable...), it becomes even more confusing. An expression of disbelief is surely the very last thing this acronym should imply. But it did to me; even as a non-native speaker (German). "General Termination of Future Operations" is, also in my eyes, a made-up term to fit the joke.