Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Confusion about number of outstanding CIDs (#1464)
Nick Banks <notifications@github.com> Wed, 20 June 2018 20:46 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 0795D130EBF for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 13:46:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.01
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] 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 Zhg8We_49wB4 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 13:46:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-6.smtp.github.com (out-6.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.197]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2ECE9130E1B for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 13:46:02 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 13:46:00 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1529527560; bh=snPQOhO+5pENBcezOyRjzxdQWMRnh+lLawQ6wBTkQKo=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=hr9nDZdvwHh1g4hkfAWxHG0FzzZMVtrzmPMZmxrTT6lPLZMxx9Jmf9LPnzX4mpPKu pf8G1ifg4N2po1qFhf0kM4j+VyXOC66slPBrdIvdUhRQt8cIXqz/vH0NvEYAbZ2h+w N7giUpGoK2SxJvTk3UONLAF4L1zodxDJKiCDWJEQ=
From: Nick Banks <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab4cb79f7b237bbc19ea81e30e5d29d3ecc99fe1a892cf0000000117427f0892a169ce13eb7977@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1464/398890796@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1464@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1464@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Confusion about number of outstanding CIDs (#1464)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5b2abd0827ce9_5b4b2ae98e0a4f54165e5"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: nibanks
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/MAin5gIgRb9LCFY6VwQvYmGyMzI>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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, 20 Jun 2018 20:46:05 -0000
I do agree that it's implementation specific, but I still think it's something they spec should provide recommendations for. For @mikkelfj's scenario, I'm more worried about the server side. It keeps giving out more CIDs and the client keeps using them. Should we have a way for the client to explicitly tell the server that a particular old CID is no longer in use? Otherwise the best I can see the server doing it having some timer (idle timeout period?) per CID to age it out or just a simple max number of simultaneous CIDs to allow at any one time, and as new CIDs are given out, if there is no more room, the oldest is automatically aged out. -- 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/1464#issuecomment-398890796
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Confusion about number o… Martin Thomson
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Confusion about number o… ekr
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Confusion about number o… Kazuho Oku
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Confusion about number o… Nick Banks
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Confusion about number o… Mike Bishop
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Confusion about number o… MikkelFJ
- [quicwg/base-drafts] Confusion about number of ou… Mike Bishop
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Confusion about number o… Mike Bishop
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Confusion about number o… Mike Bishop