Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Remembering transport parameters (#3434)

Mike Bishop <> Tue, 25 February 2020 15:47 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 493913A0F30 for <>; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 07:47:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.482
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.482 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, 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, 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 IdLo7JNPbs_8 for <>; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 07:47:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C399E3A0CF4 for <>; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 07:47:35 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 07:47:34 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1582645654; bh=4LN4hSQkCPoaP8n9LwDTvw1PNIX27a8806o5xorf810=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=SXO6zuAFrpa+SRRm7dIm25zSv5UpYD5JVHTAJ8BDAYOf7fEzF277ixBvB+7qrEZGB yaa88lLcL4WQUIO++9PvtL8w+NVhsj56pEF+LwaWJQwXChCPv+9dYf8pzv6GSrpVXH 1QTP1/Svt5Jt4dre/vBJFOspyIH5d27prqCBOEMY=
From: Mike Bishop <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3434/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Remembering transport parameters (#3434)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e554196d5ce7_611d3fa398ccd9601137c3"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: MikeBishop
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: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 15:47:37 -0000

>     3. Is the server allowed to advertise a lower max_packet_size in its new TPs? I can imagine some use cases to motivate a "yes", and it has the advantage of being what the text already says.

> the server MUST NOT reduce any limits or alter any values that might be violated by the client with its 0-RTT data

I think it's fairly clear that the client *could* violate the server's max packet size in 0-RTT so this would seem to apply.  But since the penalty for that is dropped packets, rather than connection errors, I agree that it shouldn't have to apply.

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