Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Handling of Retire Prior To field (#3046)

Kazuho Oku <> Wed, 18 September 2019 07:20 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 390E0120819 for <>; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 00:20:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.596
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.596 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, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, 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 qJnfVeTE_IAL for <>; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 00:20:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 29679120800 for <>; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 00:20:41 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 00:20:40 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1568791240; bh=B5GuunZt7yVLlBOsJlNk20waxtDsQhrhZNWKXAmHw0U=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=s+BDw9Q3IsBfHoatCmwdJe4VbpTZfw8ZgvXn9JMnlmYbqVvQrX+cVJG9zEJrea7WX dVD4YVXKyVxN4uVEvP6/Af8gfES6Hmrf7iyTMo6nMgjI0yoBEoseoj5zasK/pds5dh Kxt8HyrVK5e8yl9FQodrsX6cp4SO9jzvCyUZErP8=
From: Kazuho Oku <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3046/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Handling of Retire Prior To field (#3046)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d81dac846056_235f3fd78b2cd95c1444d8"; 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: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 07:20:43 -0000

@erickinnear Thank you for the explanation and the links. They help a lot in understanding how we ended up here.

> Whatever the answer here, the SHOULD was chosen because "timely manner" isn't defined in a testable fashion. If someone wants to argue for MUST, then we need a firmer definition of the reaction.

Yeah we already state that "_an endpoint MAY discard a connection ID for which retirement has been requested once an interval of no less than 3 PTO has elapsed since an acknowledgement is received for the NEW_CONNECTION_ID frame requesting that retirement._" So I think it's testable.

Considering that we have a MAY on the side that initiates the retirement, I think we can have a MUST on the receiver side (assuming that we want to).

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