Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Limit RCID state (#3547)

Kazuho Oku <> Tue, 31 March 2020 23:46 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 672273A0D6B for <>; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 16:46:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.474
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.474 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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_28=0.726, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, 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 IlhpoVNcEsJx for <>; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 16:46:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC5153A0D6A for <>; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 16:46:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2C4D28020C for <>; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1585698361; bh=86EloU7gVcQeKsA18MvLLUkKESuGlvxD0fvFPk7LJDY=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=CuTtn+TbhJaamcpfmagKUVD4oj+Sv1NNBft4PGW8HgXH2riE4nX8Enqw28nvBvnuf 43mLz92lfdbupWCiUKpS85YnDL7mVgg7NIuWnA3invFwS7kvTk9iIg7QzwjZZGHpq6 Mr03308cOj6ELbj65WYn6mvRHLaiR2Qm9qQlm/2Y=
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 16:46:01 -0700
From: Kazuho Oku <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3547/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Limit RCID state (#3547)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e83d639c328b_797d3f8bb1ccd96486936"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: kazuho
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: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 23:46:05 -0000

@kazuho commented on this pull request.

> @@ -1069,6 +1069,15 @@ to cease using the connection IDs when requested can result in connection
 failures, as the issuing endpoint might be unable to continue using the
 connection IDs with the active connection.
+An endpoint SHOULD limit the number of outstanding RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frames
+to bound the necessary state. In order to allow a peer to retire all previously
+issued connection IDs, the limit on the number of outstanding
+RETIRE_CONNECTION_IDs SHOULD be at least the active_connection_id_limit. An

@martinduke Thank you for sharing your experience.

Could you please clarify why you have two limits? Are you limiting the number of inflight RCID frames to 4, even though you retain state of up to 100 CIDs to be retired?

I'm curious, because that's not something I would expect as an outcome of this PR. My read of the text proposed in the PR has been that we assume that a RCID frame becomes "outstanding" when an endpoint decides to (or being instructed to) retire a CID.

IIUC, what we need to do is limit the amount of state that the endpoint retains. Number of RCID frames sent at one time does not really matter, as it is bound by the CWND size.

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