[quicwg/base-drafts] Recommendation for rate limits (#1673)

mirjak <notifications@github.com> Thu, 16 August 2018 16:45 UTC

Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 09:45:14 -0700
From: mirjak <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab4938c5d2c7416f70e98dcc6bc2e9d331ce8f3a3092cf00000001178d6c1a92a169ce14f02dbc@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1673@github.com>
Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] Recommendation for rate limits (#1673)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5b75aa1a76cd9_45ee3fc0cf4be61c150612a"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/ClD8uRCek6Q6h0GG-WA4sQSzPMg>

There are to recommended/required rate limits in the transport draft:

"an endpoint MAY
   limit the rate at which it sends PATH_RESPONSE frames"

and

"Until a peer's address is deemed valid, an endpoint MUST
   limit the rate at which it sends data to this address."

Can we maybe provide more guidance what those rate limits should be or at least an upper bound because otherwise using normative language doesn't help much...?

-- 
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/1673

[quicwg/base-drafts] Recommendation for rate limi… mirjak
Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Recommendation for rate … mirjak
Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Recommendation for rate … Martin Thomson
Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Recommendation for rate … Martin Thomson
Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Recommendation for rate … Martin Thomson