Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] QPACK Appendix B: nameIndex (#3544)

Kazu Yamamoto <> Wed, 25 March 2020 01:23 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85E1C3A086F for <>; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 18:23:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.554
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.554 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_20=1.546, 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: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2YcU68-rs2Mz for <>; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 18:23:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BAF113A0813 for <>; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 18:23:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C435BA1DE8 for <>; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 18:23:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1585099385; bh=54pqzgY1m4G98cmkYRpKkYXjTHbZs6eVUH89oVnLnXs=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=k6NkQyXwbw7zmVmhPom3qCTnawbb3KnwHS01u1nfYm926cexmOUc4MEd/LWtMfYLQ xUyi/3jCfWLbe/48jPCjm5O2HbStlmYiQVxGsDIYw2wEIiZDCG2sEWTZy7yfTSvW1K 39qnsEpE6rU60j+3t+3E4MnTpCeJOle6XgA//n6c=
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 18:23:05 -0700
From: Kazu Yamamoto <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3544/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] QPACK Appendix B: nameIndex (#3544)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e7ab279b4a3c_1a553fbb2f8cd9601021c7"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: kazu-yamamoto
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: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 01:23:10 -0000

Let's suppose that `nameIdx` and `nameIndex` are the same.

The next question is how `getNameIndex` should behave?

The return value (`nameIdx`) is compared with `staticTable.size`. But it is also used for dynamic table. If my understanding is correct, the index spaces of the two table are independent. I cannot understand what is returned from `getNameIndex`.

Can `getNameIndex` return `nil`? If `nameIdx` can be `nil`, `nameIdx <= staticTable.size` causes an error. If it cannot be `nil`, it means that an index for the name cab be always found, which, I think, is not realistic.

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