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

Martin Thomson <> Mon, 30 March 2020 22:41 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8213E3A14CA for <>; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 15:41:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 u2zTghaxOH8C for <>; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 15:41:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11CB83A14C9 for <>; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 15:41:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 371DB282986 for <>; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 15:41:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1585608062; bh=bvj+TcFVzq/WEbkgJyuobst5ewOxOeD7tgMSu7BwWRQ=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=ecW3L5Hd6qQ9zgxJR545R2m9mWZECixszJbO0TmGt608MV6EkhmUODzfCzTzjY9tY ygFlPLVak3stEkYfVAyAUeu3nC6x+boryP1Lpa/CnLnMbXR2kUqO1JNSD5KU+eEvV/ JaG761D2u3K/O1hlTrlb0DkIiI9f2xnQwsiddfTk=
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 15:41:02 -0700
From: Martin Thomson <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3547/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Limit RCID state (#3547)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e82757e277d7_5d193fc970ecd96013451c"; 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: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 22:41:05 -0000

@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

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

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.

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: