Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Are transport parameters mandatory? (#2528)

David Schinazi <> Wed, 20 March 2019 03:24 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A53AB126C15 for <>; Tue, 19 Mar 2019 20:24:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.001
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.001 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, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-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 JQPKpfpQNxzN for <>; Tue, 19 Mar 2019 20:24:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 035DD1224E8 for <>; Tue, 19 Mar 2019 20:24:44 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 20:24:43 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1553052283; bh=1Ndau3+2ZD7bSe+ZqB1TcJRrtg8lTItcz2TJSHVVGq0=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=tAnPwQDgk1BbPiLE9RSORhy3PbLB2lrzafsTJtOOLm6vAqXlshZ0WKdfSzZzaqDKw Ymj2jMHvnOkt5CRgqI0Y24XTlDu853BCq6tZzp3J1xeAxzDUoJcDKhSEbHusnliJ8r 611mBiviJzAqG/IwurGyKe38aQkgSH2UBTRcPiSQ=
From: David Schinazi <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2528/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Are transport parameters mandatory? (#2528)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c91b27b9f146_7ed93fe5b04d45c41390cb"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: DavidSchinazi
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, 20 Mar 2019 03:24:47 -0000

I agree with @kazuho's and @martinthomson's points. This was more of a belt-and-suspenders approach. That said, I still think every single deployment will actually send transport parameters, therefore requiring the extension to be present sounds simpler to implement. But I don't feel too strongly about this.

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