Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Should retiring all CIDs be an error? (#2101)

Martin Thomson <> Wed, 12 December 2018 00:42 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 430BE130F62 for <>; Tue, 11 Dec 2018 16:42:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.842
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.842 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1.46, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 M64MXlC7LS_k for <>; Tue, 11 Dec 2018 16:42:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CA3D130F3E for <>; Tue, 11 Dec 2018 16:42:22 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 16:42:22 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1544575342; bh=ef9rSZ0oBpIfPj0qvrCsSfcCzhvbpRIMHLkptVhJraY=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=tNapmEp9h5SywuuajNosmSsNoYn/DE8cNG+sJCo2ZDT9rra1hMDgdy2CqkJzZds3R UoeR/VL0gdJ1Lua9+QmQwGZ/ObvpzaAdVwerzd+Sf+omIEbgdxpK2IlzJ4GYx3pyGc bk9AiAtCIaTptBXOG9ls65t7IV7t3XkNVACYPLgQ=
From: Martin Thomson <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2101/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Should retiring all CIDs be an error? (#2101)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c10596e18342_34223f8555ad45c0202316"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: martinthomson
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, 12 Dec 2018 00:42:24 -0000

Clever.  But I'm not sure that this relationship is maintained.  We used to have frame processing dependent on the packet header.  It wasn't popular and I think that was the very first thing we fixed.

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