Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Limit RCID state (#3547)

[Martin Thomson <[e-mail]>]

@martinthomson approved this pull request.

Thanks for working on this.  I have some suggestions to reduce text.  That reduction won't make things worse, I think.

> @@ -1069,6 +1069,19 @@ to cease using the connection IDs when requested can result in connection
 failures, as the issuing endpoint might be unable to continue using the
 connection IDs with the active connection.
 
+An endpoint SHOULD elect to limit the number of outstanding RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID

```suggestion
An endpoint SHOULD limit the number of outstanding RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID
```

> +RETIRE_CONNECTION_IDs SHOULD be at least the active_connection_id_limit.  If the
+number of outstanding RETIRE_CONNECTION_IDs exceeds twice the
+active_connection_id_limit, the connection MAY be closed with a connection error
+of type CONNECTION_ID_LIMIT_ERROR.

```suggestion
RETIRE_CONNECTION_IDs SHOULD be at least the active_connection_id_limit.
```
That sentence is unnecessary.  If a peer starts forcing extra retirement, then this is no different than any of the multitude of other pathological behaviours they might exhibit.  It doesn't need special text.

> +Endpoints SHOULD NOT issue updates of the Retire Prior To field before receiving
+RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frames for the previous update of Retire Prior To. Doing so
+may result in the peer being unwilling to immediately retire all the connection
+IDs, if retiring them would cause it to exceed its limit on outstanding
+RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frames, as described above.

```suggestion
Endpoints SHOULD NOT issue updates of the Retire Prior To field before receiving
RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frames for the previous update of Retire Prior To.
```
Rather than explain this and get the numbers right, just leave the recommendation.

-- 
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/pull/3547#pullrequestreview-384281576