[quicwg/base-drafts] Definition of "active connection ID" is misleading (or the name is) (#3200)

Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com> Thu, 07 November 2019 01:21 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@github.com>
X-Original-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B31B1208C6 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 17:21:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.595
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.595 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_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZAAnGO443kLS for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 17:21:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-24.smtp.github.com (out-24.smtp.github.com []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D84021208E2 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 17:21:55 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 17:21:54 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1573089714; bh=bweR8FSXsI1Uc/d+fRqOb4m9uW2Zzhc5WnHdurbJakw=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=dJ71XMVqiElNWlZtjb4a2rA2b9xxKKsPcGyuN8BFGvzOjifDQWef/tgVbJ4p15z7S m3wuRc7q3PDilakop/6KdNZLTFN6ePV6DyDrEVyI7MuE66l7gezcdFuklbIIFjbAwV aXCgFblHj5XzmkcWOBFaChBbH2ZBLUO9prbuVD4E=
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK2CKXJ5OQJ4SF5IOB532CSDFEVBNHHB53YOA4@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3200@github.com>
Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] Definition of "active connection ID" is misleading (or the name is) (#3200)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5dc371b239b2b_b8d3fe6d42cd968303755"; 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
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/6pKgcoaT2TXCz7qjS8hSqalzgLc>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 07 Nov 2019 01:22:05 -0000

In [section 5.1.1](https://quicwg.org/base-drafts/draft-ietf-quic-transport.html#rfc.section.5.1.1), we state that:
> An endpoint SHOULD ensure that its peer has a sufficient number of available and unused connection IDs. Endpoints store received connection IDs for future use and advertise the number of connection IDs they are willing to store with the active_connection_id_limit transport parameter. An endpoint SHOULD NOT provide more connection IDs than the peer’s limit.
> An endpoint SHOULD supply a new connection ID when it receives a packet with a previously unused connection ID or when the peer retires one, unless providing the new connection ID would exceed the peer’s limit.

I think that these are correct. However, we also state:
> Connection IDs that are issued and not retired are considered active; any active connection ID can be used.

I think this is incorrect. This should instead state that "Connection IDs that are **unused and** not retired are considered active, ..."

That said, I think the name is confusing, as it is awkward to argue that the connection ID that is currently used is "active."

Maybe we should rename the parameter to something like "spare_connection_id_limit."

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