Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Can Server Require Connection ID to be Included in Packets Sent by Clients? (#789)

[Ryan Hamilton <[e-mail]>]

" The Connection ID field can only be omitted if the omit_connection_id
transport parameter is specified by the intended recipient of the packet."

So if a server does not send this parameter, the client must send
connection IDs. I think that gives you what you want?

On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 7:15 AM, Nick Banks <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> This is slightly related to #659
> <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/659>.
>
> Is it reasonable/acceptable for a server implementation to require that a
> client always include the connection ID? If so, what exactly should it do
> if it receives a new connection where the client specified
> omit_connection_id in its transport parameters? Should it drop the
> connection? Send an error back (if so, what error)?
>
> It seems to me that if we want to allow servers to restrict the usage of
> omit_connection_id by the client, we should probably have some mechanism
> to indicate the client the connection must include the connection ID. One
> possibility is a new transport parameters that is server specific that
> indicates connection id is required.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/789>, or mute the thread
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ASp6yhsIaC7pDEAFMOZTLZ0DGVk83n7qks5sk8DlgaJpZM4PgxIT>
> .
>


-- 
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/789#issuecomment-331461802