IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] negative base values (#4938)

Bence Béky <notifications@github.com> Tue, 05 October 2021 14:56 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 [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B15213A077C for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 07:56:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.934
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.934 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.452, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ft0BeiAbbidn for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 07:56:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.github.com (out-18.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E5A83A0113 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 07:56:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-f045d1f.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-f045d1f.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.19.54]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 849DB340C20 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 07:56:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1633445790; bh=Cfumf3NJNKBdIPlCnTLJo9HdN9QhS/LajaKcy4CcuUU=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=TUsk0BSqSaGUNKKsgwSqcE+Oe43xSQJN2XPbtlPjbctAYg5qhrp2JwEKXR6sl3935 VvQKWQKxfiLVpU6XEpl9ruYGCtA2SFO/a1Z+smZvIA+LVEDM7eb2ZKg/NwXloyzSOF X616HMGilkY89KCr/I0Vul1d+xYCV6BvUrnCovEc=
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2021 07:56:30 -0700
From: =?UTF-8?B?QmVuY2UgQsOpa3k=?= <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK2QXP5A3OOUZ2VPBJN7NBEJ5EVBNHHDYENBTM@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4938/934487083@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4938@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4938@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] negative base values (#4938)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_615c679e77b81_5827c760229099"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: bencebeky
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/D7QT41Y3v_guM43tKv5GcbMcRFw>
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: Tue, 05 Oct 2021 14:56:43 -0000

Kazuho, nice find!  I agree with your intuition.  In fact when I implemented QPACK decoding back in December 2018 I already assumed Base must not be negative and made our decoder close the connection (not just the stream) with QPACK_DECOMPRESSION_FAILED if it was negative, see https://github.com/google/quiche/blob/a6ef0a64fd597e53003c7846192790ed0e3642b5/quic/core/qpack/qpack_progressive_decoder.cc#L331.  This implementation has been used by Google's servers and by Chrome ever since we support HTTP/3, and I have not seen reports of interop problems, so I assume not many encoders out there generate negative Base values.

I support adding clarification to the specs.

-- 
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/4938#issuecomment-934487083

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email