Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Handling of Retire Prior To field (#3046)

Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com> Tue, 01 October 2019 16:29 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@github.com>
X-Original-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88D81120A5E for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 09:29:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.281
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.281 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.618, 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
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eDGxwJQW6-pE for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 09:29:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-5.smtp.github.com (out-5.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE676120855 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 09:29:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-25680bd.va3-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-25680bd.va3-iad.github.net [10.48.17.61]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E18F6960588 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 09:29:10 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2019 09:29:10 -0700
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK5UMWMIGDELUCW4LQN3UCYVNEVBNHHB27HBVI@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3046/537117388@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3046@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3046@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Handling of Retire Prior To field (#3046)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d937ed6d2d1a_48513ffa840cd9603574ae"; 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
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/1stbvPGiv9PgduozfZoG104JxYg>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <quic-issues.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic-issues/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic-issues@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2019 16:29:23 -0000

While I agree that we have tried to make MUST requirements testable, I am not certain if it is a goo idea to avoid use of MUST when a requirement cannot be tested (or if doing so is a good idea, per the definition of the keywords in RFC 2119).

At least for this particular case, isn't it a requirement for an endpoint to drop the old connection IDs?

Though I could well be wrong though in how the keywords are used in practice.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3046#issuecomment-537117388