[quicwg/base-drafts] Version negotiation, reserved or 0x?a?a?a?a (#2540)

[Lars Eggert <[e-mail]>]

Section 6.3 says
```
   For a server to use a new version in the future, clients must
   correctly handle unsupported versions.  To help ensure this, a server
   SHOULD include a reserved version (see Section 15) while generating a
   Version Negotiation packet.
```
And then Section 15 defines two kinds of "reserved" versions, which makes the paragraph above ambiguous.
```
   Versions with the most significant 16 bits of the version number
   cleared are reserved for use in future IETF consensus documents.

   Versions that follow the pattern 0x?a?a?a?a are reserved for use in
   forcing version negotiation to be exercised.
```
...
```
   Reserved version numbers will probably never represent a real
   protocol; a client MAY use one of these version numbers with the
   expectation that the server will initiate version negotiation; a
   server MAY advertise support for one of these versions and can expect
   that clients ignore the value.
```
Is the intent in Section 6.3 that a server SHOULD include a version that is reserved **for forcing version negotiation** (i.e., matches 0x?a?a?a?a), or SHOULD a server include a version reserved for future IETF consensus documents (i.e., matching 0x0000????). Or both?

-- 
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/2540