Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Robert Wilton's QPACK Comment 3 (#4802)

[afrind <[e-mail]>]

There is already a requirement that implementations be able to decode 62 bit integers.  Anything larger is really necessary -- we intentionally encode the "Required Insert Count" on the wire in a way that bounds its size to be much smaller practically.  The requirement stems from the need to decode QUIC stream IDs.  I think @dtikhonov's comment about bignums is about what an implementation might do if it overflowed its internal representation decoding the Required Insert Count.  This is not a practical concern, and can be completely worked around with a "clever" implementation that is worried about more than 2^64 table insertions.

HTTP also provides a setting to inform the peer of a maximum size of a field section (MAX_FIELD_SECTION_SIZE -- see HTTP/3 section 4.1.1.3), which is also a practical upper bound for any single QPACK string for HTTP/3.  Perhaps the QPACK doc could provide this hint?  I'll draft a PR to this effect.

-- 
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/4802#issuecomment-769164722