IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Extension frames (#1068)

Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com> Mon, 09 April 2018 05:48 UTC

Return-Path: <bounces+848413-a050-quic-issues=ietf.org@sgmail.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 E786E124235 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 8 Apr 2018 22:48:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.01
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=github.com
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 RKwVD-ciIZ_o for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 8 Apr 2018 22:48:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from o11.sgmail.github.com (o11.sgmail.github.com [167.89.101.202]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F7381200A0 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Sun, 8 Apr 2018 22:48:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; h=from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=wFd1voKqt4dEl4B86lNpAV2b0Uk=; b=BnLfh7oU6302tv4B i287rKCDl3H9d7zT6znDU9VQj9hrEI79tbpLPpQbthuZvqW2UYCKxFsyro8lZPF5 fCrHer7QTD4p8S8wzS7XdTTR9auxra/O8F0GyLjIidQBL4TP47yEpGvZCmwnj0Hm 5fe0/UgeRptuRevz517txgymCl8=
Received: by filter0819p1mdw1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter0819p1mdw1-5034-5ACAFEC5-6 2018-04-09 05:48:53.395769174 +0000 UTC
Received: from smtp.github.com (out-5.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.196]) by ismtpd0011p1iad2.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id CZz4diSxQHKRfU0RKn4Lvw for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 05:48:53.424 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 05:48:53 +0000
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab7a01c16af3e6e76df5630fb9c12edbf8d47c583892cf0000000116e2c0c592a169ce115ea54e@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1068/c379639925@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1068@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1068@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Extension frames (#1068)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5acafec53ac19_f332b0a176d4ed4959a9"; 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
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak1ai4k2jQX9I94RwWgMEkdmMKoPVMN++ABm24 bStXfm6i0y24S0spgE5gqDNUIMpKrtj/muTWgPj9652wZbb0yE1kcWWQGS72VajxcE8sBnnhIy+m+O ziyKFQl+GfgPI2fyG7IUgz1aJl+9xu+FsVpnRpAq8kTdb/i5WiHuctOYKBSmBMMt4sVAUyI9jsowWI w=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/46qIt4QX55BVELyiBil1X4iywks>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 05:48:56 -0000

@martinthomson Thank you for your comments.

> I wouldn't be supportive of that sort of change. Frame types aren't 1:1 with transport parameters.

That's correct. Hence variable number of frame types (`uint8 frame_types<0..128>`).

Re coordination, if we consider that as a disaster, I think the correct path would be to let the client declare the extension IDs only in TP, and let the server to choose the frame types for which extensions that the server wants to support.

Doing so solves two issues: removes assignment of frame types that would never be used (it is useless to assign a id for a frame that the peer cannot sent), removes the possibility of having different IDs being assigned by both peers for the same extension (which would be a source of confusion).

-- 
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/pull/1068#issuecomment-379639925

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status