Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 14:39:03 -0800
From: Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts
 <reply+0166e4abbb7a025f69965f324bd9da79d88899d1af63405792cf00000001187db00792a169ce1877f890@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2466/c463831514@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2466@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2466@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Bound 0-to-1-RTT Transition (#2466)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="--==_mimepart_5c65ee0788c3f_6fa23fde7acd45b81388a4";
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/4MS2Hvhe-UF-J5DujRb0ZZ43g60>


----==_mimepart_5c65ee0788c3f_6fa23fde7acd45b81388a4
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> It's entirely possible that we spec #2461 and people implement #2466 as a good-enough way of achieving the requirement. :-)

That's OK.  Because #2461 establishes the right expectations for new transport parameters, whereas this doesn't.

If the complaint about #2461 is the complexity of enforcement, given that it is a MAY-strength requirement, I fail to see what the fuss is all about.

-- 
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/2466#issuecomment-463831514
----==_mimepart_5c65ee0788c3f_6fa23fde7acd45b81388a4
Content-Type: text/html;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<blockquote>
<p>It's entirely possible that we spec <a class=3D"issue-link js-issue-li=
nk" data-error-text=3D"Failed to load issue title" data-id=3D"409599624" =
data-permission-text=3D"Issue title is private" data-url=3D"https://githu=
b.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2461" data-hovercard-type=3D"pull_request=
" data-hovercard-url=3D"/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2461/hovercard" href=3D"=
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2461">#2461</a> and people imp=
lement <a class=3D"issue-link js-issue-link" data-error-text=3D"Failed to=
 load issue title" data-id=3D"410515600" data-permission-text=3D"Issue ti=
tle is private" data-url=3D"https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/=
2466" data-hovercard-type=3D"pull_request" data-hovercard-url=3D"/quicwg/=
base-drafts/pull/2466/hovercard" href=3D"https://github.com/quicwg/base-d=
rafts/pull/2466">#2466</a> as a good-enough way of achieving the requirem=
ent. :-)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>That's OK.  Because <a class=3D"issue-link js-issue-link" data-error-t=
ext=3D"Failed to load issue title" data-id=3D"409599624" data-permission-=
text=3D"Issue title is private" data-url=3D"https://github.com/quicwg/bas=
e-drafts/issues/2461" data-hovercard-type=3D"pull_request" data-hovercard=
-url=3D"/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2461/hovercard" href=3D"https://github.c=
om/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2461">#2461</a> establishes the right expectat=
ions for new transport parameters, whereas this doesn't.</p>
<p>If the complaint about <a class=3D"issue-link js-issue-link" data-erro=
r-text=3D"Failed to load issue title" data-id=3D"409599624" data-permissi=
on-text=3D"Issue title is private" data-url=3D"https://github.com/quicwg/=
base-drafts/issues/2461" data-hovercard-type=3D"pull_request" data-hoverc=
ard-url=3D"/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2461/hovercard" href=3D"https://githu=
b.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2461">#2461</a> is the complexity of enforc=
ement, given that it is a MAY-strength requirement, I fail to see what th=
e fuss is all about.</p>

<p style=3D"font-size:small;-webkit-text-size-adjust:none;color:#666;">&m=
dash;<br />You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thre=
ad.<br />Reply to this email directly, <a href=3D"https://github.com/quic=
wg/base-drafts/pull/2466#issuecomment-463831514">view it on GitHub</a>, o=
r <a href=3D"https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AWbkqyQiik=
X8rTdUes0XToQWrXAZodGiks5vNeWHgaJpZM4a8iof">mute the thread</a>.<img src=3D=
"https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AWbkq34V-QPktCogde6P9-Q121ixKva_=
ks5vNeWHgaJpZM4a8iof.gif" height=3D"1" width=3D"1" alt=3D"" /></p>
<script type=3D"application/json" data-scope=3D"inboxmarkup">{"api_versio=
n":"1.0","publisher":{"api_key":"05dde50f1d1a384dd78767c55493e4bb","name"=
:"GitHub"},"entity":{"external_key":"github/quicwg/base-drafts","title":"=
quicwg/base-drafts","subtitle":"GitHub repository","main_image_url":"http=
s://github.githubassets.com/images/email/message_cards/header.png","avata=
r_image_url":"https://github.githubassets.com/images/email/message_cards/=
avatar.png","action":{"name":"Open in GitHub","url":"https://github.com/q=
uicwg/base-drafts"}},"updates":{"snippets":[{"icon":"PERSON","message":"@=
martinthomson in #2466: \u003e It's entirely possible that we spec #2461 =
and people implement #2466 as a good-enough way of achieving the requirem=
ent. :-)\r\n\r\nThat's OK.  Because #2461 establishes the right expectati=
ons for new transport parameters, whereas this doesn't.\r\n\r\nIf the com=
plaint about #2461 is the complexity of enforcement, given that it is a M=
AY-strength requirement, I fail to see what the fuss is all about."}],"ac=
tion":{"name":"View Pull Request","url":"https://github.com/quicwg/base-d=
rafts/pull/2466#issuecomment-463831514"}}}</script>
<script type=3D"application/ld+json">[
{
"@context": "http://schema.org",
"@type": "EmailMessage",
"potentialAction": {
"@type": "ViewAction",
"target": "https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2466#issuecomment-4=
63831514",
"url": "https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2466#issuecomment-4638=
31514",
"name": "View Pull Request"
},
"description": "View this Pull Request on GitHub",
"publisher": {
"@type": "Organization",
"name": "GitHub",
"url": "https://github.com"
}
}
]</script>=

----==_mimepart_5c65ee0788c3f_6fa23fde7acd45b81388a4--