IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Crisp definition of BLOCKING and friends (#1889)

Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com> Fri, 19 October 2018 05:31 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 E88E0130DFC for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 22:31:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.064
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.064 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.064, 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] 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 o9_9rIfwQMr5 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 22:31:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-1.smtp.github.com (out-1.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.192]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5BEF130DC9 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 22:31:38 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 22:31:37 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1539927097; bh=9OOVlckCpvAwclVVevODyW7xyGyC2DCLLR1EpP9/5wA=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=aYruDzLpG2QsVVYjC8pVeSUjduX00OFwHH3z9X6hahhu5cTZ20P+rmri0yjn4CqhQ 9hjPwk7uTowxN6QMt3d/jXWJm41s3hp55s7e+ed5+MjYLTXhS1NI0RLpG+/4rCkfJ6 JidL2Q+t1+DxACtqxtrFCFpZOujJ3+Y+dvIvcPFI=
From: Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab41377b6a5891f54061a277c7173ed0a0a6fe8bc592cf0000000117e12e3992a169ce16294480@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1889/review/166383556@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1889@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1889@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Crisp definition of BLOCKING and friends (#1889)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5bc96c399f311_4efb3fe2fd6d45b4930a2"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: martinthomson
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/SvNkMwHz17GYs3aNeV59s7zN3vM>
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: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 05:31:41 -0000

martinthomson commented on this pull request.



> @@ -4340,8 +4340,9 @@ The STREAM_ID_BLOCKED frame contains a single field.
 
 Stream ID:
 
-: A variable-length integer indicating the highest stream ID that the sender
-  was permitted to open.
+: A variable-length integer indicating the stream ID limit at the time the
+  sender was unable to open new streams.

Hmm, that's a tricky one, changing the definition of MAX_STREAM isn't that easy.

With stream IDs, if I receive MAX_STREAM_ID of `N`, then the test for whether something is allowed is `id <= N`.  With stream octets, the test is `offset < MAX_STREAM_DATA`.  That makes this harder.

So with the latter, saying that you can't send `offset` is clean and simple (wording notwithstanding).  With streams though, you would be saying "I can only send `N` (but want to send `N+4`)", which is awkward, I agree.

Is changing the definition of MAX_STREAM_ID worth it?

-- 
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/pull/1889#discussion_r226537264

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email