Original text:
1.  In addition to providing secure, multiplexed transport, QUIC QUIC- <del> TRANSPORT includes the ability to negotiate a version.  This allows </del>  the protocol to change over time in response to new requirements. <del> Many characteristics of the protocol will change between versions. </del>  This document describes the subset of QUIC that is intended to remain stable as new versions are developed and deployed.  All of these assumptions that might be made based on knowledge of QUIC version 1; these do not apply to every version of QUIC. <del> 2. </del>  The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and This document uses terms and notational conventions from QUIC- TRANSPORT. <del> 3. QUIC is a connection-oriented protocol between two endpoints.  Those endpoints exchange UDP datagrams.  These UDP datagrams contain QUIC packets.  QUIC endpoints use QUIC packets to establish a QUIC connection, which is shared protocol state between those endpoints. </del> 4. Packet diagrams in this document use a format defined in QUIC-

Reviewer comments:
Gorry thought that it might be worth saying what QUIC is first. I agree. Tiny tweaks to the intro to allow for the change. Including a new title.
Issue raised by NAME via :
I like it. I'll see what that looks like. I have read Version-Independent Properties of QUIC (-30) in the WGLC and think this is ready, I found 3 editorial comments that might need consideration after the WGLC: (i) I suggest the introduction for this spec starts abruptly. Is it worth considering one sentence top explain what QUIC is, in case someone read this document first? - One possible solution could be to move the text in section 3 to section 1? (To me, the section 3 text does not need to come after the Section 2 definitions.) (ii) Does this read better with /for/ moved within the sentence? OLD:/At the endpoint, the connection ID is used to identify which QUIC connection the packet is intended for./ NEW:/At the endpoint, the connection ID is used to identify the QUIC connection for which the packet is intended./ (iii) I see the desire to emphasise the “NOT”, but I query if this is correct usage of a RFC2119 keyword in Appendix A?: /The following statements are NOT guaranteed to be true for every QUIC version:/ Best wishes, Gorry

Revised text:
1. <ins> QUIC is a connection-oriented protocol between two endpoints.  Those endpoints exchange UDP datagrams.  These UDP datagrams contain QUIC packets.  QUIC endpoints use QUIC packets to establish a QUIC connection, which is shared protocol state between those endpoints. 2. </ins> In addition to providing secure, multiplexed transport, QUIC QUIC-  <ins> TRANSPORT allows for the option to negotiate a version.  This allows </ins> the protocol to change over time in response to new requirements.  <ins> Many characteristics of the protocol could change between versions. </ins> This document describes the subset of QUIC that is intended to remain stable as new versions are developed and deployed.  All of these assumptions that might be made based on knowledge of QUIC version 1; these do not apply to every version of QUIC.  <ins> 3. </ins> The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and This document uses terms and notational conventions from QUIC- TRANSPORT.  4. Packet diagrams in this document use a format defined in QUIC-