[quicwg/base-drafts] active_connection_id_limit description is unclear about whose connection ID might be zero length (#3427)

Nick Harper <notifications@github.com> Wed, 05 February 2020 15:52 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@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 0348D1200FE for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 07:52:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.596
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.596 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, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 h_95pSWeXLrd for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 07:52:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-5.smtp.github.com (out-5.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17DB7120052 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 07:52:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from github-lowworker-2ef7ba1.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-2ef7ba1.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.16.66]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BD519606E6 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 07:52:17 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1580917937; bh=FBHKl4HlDwJcJn99do69HPTeoxM/mbN49ITNBjxHock=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=nZ3qmfZHuLa0Pa5xalpcmS70c/T5wNshvOrHB1MXKuJJToUa+uqvh8Y3x0ZOTW3IW hnHRu0g0Jb94PNvwQZnS/8Obcai6M69T4QBkclb9o9j2cy9Eo1rR0lcyzeO3zyfy/h RPfagomRT7RlDVnQ/MxbGpPYX5BY3Awkm5xum3LQ=
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2020 07:52:17 -0800
From: Nick Harper <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK3JN3L25QKEA73ZEZV4JALTDEVBNHHCCZ7ZBM@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3427@github.com>
Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] active_connection_id_limit description is unclear about whose connection ID might be zero length (#3427)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e3ae4b14573f_49db3fc78a2cd96825163"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: nharper
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/I9GfEbDA1VCRREln6ahqG7mMiiI>
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: Wed, 05 Feb 2020 15:52:20 -0000

The current language defining the active_connection_id_limit transport parameter refers to "a zero-length connection ID is being used". It's unclear whether the zero-length CID is the CID of the sender of the TP or the receiver of the TP. Since this TP limits how many CIDs the peer can send, the references to using a zero-length CID only make sense if it's the peer using a zero-length CID, but it would be useful to clean up that language.

I've created PR #3426 to clarify this language, including that checking whether the peer is using a zero-length CID can only be done by the server.

-- 
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/3427