Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Allow server to enforce post-Retry packet numbering (#3989)

Kazuho Oku <> Wed, 02 September 2020 04:57 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2ADA3A0BCE for <>; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 21:57:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.555
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.555 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, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, 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 gaHlZatMhKd2 for <>; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 21:57:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94C653A0B4C for <>; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 21:57:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B635D520D6B for <>; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 21:57:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1599022637; bh=afEDTz+fnieasi5nYeXyUT3FuZBDqWm/rFPkUiDrY4A=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=eTsagdiYkpyuy5CNMVZeMXiu7m9+B6ngJKHtXWLbkClldkP5g1V2+rEZF5xbOlm0L J9uq+LUTRutDuuxfIzTmyHL5aIi2aiMQ2AJptwAr8AuWwF9iQ4rBIlRFauuhD9Przh O0mJ/5or7jokk5y9OiqGOmTrMGT8oCUtTwCtbLls=
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2020 21:57:17 -0700
From: Kazuho Oku <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3989/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Allow server to enforce post-Retry packet numbering (#3989)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5f4f262da5449_26dd196496172"; 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, 02 Sep 2020 04:57:20 -0000

> Do we have any MUST in the (QUIC) spec for which it's forbidden (i.e. the peer MUST NOT) to enforce it?

One example that I can immediately recall is the handling of Version Negotiation packet. An endpoint (including client) is forbidden to respond to a Version Negotiation packet with a Version Negotiation packet, but the server is forbidden to recognize Version Negotiation packets.

Re writing down the principles, my +1 goes to opening a new issue.

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