IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Why are we bothering to number CIDs? (#2159)

Mike Bishop <notifications@github.com> Thu, 13 December 2018 22:56 UTC

Return-Path: <bounces+848413-a050-quic-issues=ietf.org@sgmail.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 40B3E130EA9 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 14:56:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.056
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.056 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_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 XJnvcKUETLQ5 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 14:56:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from o10.sgmail.github.com (o10.sgmail.github.com [167.89.101.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 22E56127AC2 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 14:56:27 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; h=from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=aN/5Ih4NBOys+YFAYd9Lc3xcwWs=; b=N1WCSutFdD41SZt6 54cRZVS2lwtslHxFPQmp7Z5AmNv01S5sXt+5GDLV29rFgjxVIp7d+FxF4xmLJ21g liZmvR9z+PTIcilUzmoxZuSQyOWyAV91P9hoQzjYCH0BdiTd8B3aXz0v6vPrY/ZV RvNLqVUgXYgIamgs6D///nlmL+M=
Received: by filter0187p1iad2.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter0187p1iad2-30646-5C12E39A-39 2018-12-13 22:56:26.220568791 +0000 UTC m=+1862.841507074
Received: from github-lowworker-dc5ea3e.cp1-iad.github.net (unknown [192.30.252.45]) by ismtpd0025p1iad2.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id 5u8b_oLVTn2ID2X3JmUtAg for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 22:56:26.192 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from github.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by github-lowworker-dc5ea3e.cp1-iad.github.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 319D2260934 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 14:56:26 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 22:56:26 +0000
From: Mike Bishop <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab3b8842e2e9c1221398fdffcadfb751705c09ae8d92cf00000001182aa59a92a169ce174c07b8@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2159/447151452@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2159@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2159@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Why are we bothering to number CIDs? (#2159)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c12e39a2fd60_408f3f8528ad45c0112075"; 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
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak3LKn1/tqo4yFxDhdmigr4s1msiZgFBNAN9L5 1fyKdxiCRbXctX6bxDdFGULVnC7EOOnyiQO5tXR0JW+YqJ5zIRHCvffTrySs4VOD/HcwgLJlnPJOJy fZsGmsn+IvN602vzQCTJz/GMlEW946iAn8If4HZdb1PXsWmA7M/vFIUFjKsrpELk7HVYLF4CH460f9 s=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/I53iFJ0_dF7bR1wLi-SChV9MJkA>
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: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 22:56:30 -0000

This goes back to the thing you didn't like about receiving lower-valued MAX_STREAM_DATA frames -- some implementations might have naive retransmission strategies that retransmit frames which don't actually matter anymore.  It's suboptimal, but not illegal.  If the frame shows up, even a really long time later, we've stated that's not a failure condition.

-- 
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/2159#issuecomment-447151452

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email