Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Request to Retire Locally Issued CIDs (#2769)

[MikkelFJ <[e-mail]>]

mikkelfj commented on this pull request.



> @@ -5018,10 +5034,16 @@ sequence number, or if a sequence number is used for different connection
 IDs, the endpoint MAY treat that receipt as a connection error of type
 PROTOCOL_VIOLATION.
 
+If the Retire Prior To field is present it is a request for the peer to
+immediately retire all connection IDs with a sequence number less than the
+specified value.  For more information see {{retiring-cids}}.  This field
+should only ever increase, though reordering and retransmission of older packets
+may make it seem to decrease.  So any decrease in this field should be ignored.
+

Or, I'm not sure: it is a burden for the receiver to check the prior to field. The sequence number ought to be the only value ruling validity. One could state that the receiver MAY issue a protocol violation if the a sequence number is received hat contradict monotonic increase in prior to values.

-- 
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/2769#discussion_r290506794