Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Security Considerations text for a memory limit (#3004)

Kazuho Oku <> Wed, 04 September 2019 03:55 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80C6D1200B1 for <>; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 20:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.596
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.596 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RoMPYxZ-1GY2 for <>; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 20:55:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2F6112008A for <>; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 20:55:02 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2019 20:55:01 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1567569301; bh=QxLwNSV6QtqSKVz293u1EHbLoZcivBWf9nLgDV5HJ0I=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=CnfLLWSxGr53F2HRDuBAeW0r2ZACw5nrN1VhnzH5wnRhqPctpgiLymemP+7oTklgq u7Hnve47tnzu4tz93Ns/V/lsAHms/Emy1iSn7r6mCT8NPzfw7hyZpe6+P/8X19dG3P 6BLaM+kabOomdNjwhmks8159oah7tNOGPUL9Urhs=
From: Kazuho Oku <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3004/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Security Considerations text for a memory limit (#3004)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d6f3595c2b81_3093f82ed6cd96418632f"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: kazuho
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2019 03:55:05 -0000

kazuho commented on this pull request.

> @@ -1126,6 +1126,13 @@ HTTP_QPACK_DECODER_STREAM_ERROR (0x202):
+While the negotiated limit on the dynamic table size accounts for much of the
+memory that can be consumed by a QPACK implementation, data which cannot be
+immediately sent due to flow control is not affected by this limit.
+Implementations MUST limit the size of unsent data, especially on the decoder

I think that having a MUST for the decoder stream might make sense (as the peer controls what is to be sent on the decoder stream). OTOH I share the view that having MUST limit + MUST close if exceeded is a bit off for the encoder stream.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: