Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Strengthen 2119 language around tokens. (#2124)

janaiyengar <> Thu, 13 December 2018 02:40 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B459712D4E6 for <>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 18:40:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.46
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.46 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1.46, 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: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7x6zmqx0DBzf for <>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 18:40:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F1D6F129A87 for <>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 18:40:15 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 18:40:15 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1544668815; bh=xkqRoN1bDeKLvj8mQQmC7GiG0sp2SzFTdASj+iqCU5U=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=UttdVhYZrBq6NDYrK2bXFmmpStDt5lWg5reHe9owPKU9Jb+p2PUXQUIzZZneGpNWl a58MccEbS3/zhUCc9077TY6diBcrn9t2vyh6n8z2gNP63UFnpPkToO5bvA+y5UWkMG YgjrhuXhHvA7OqP3SjLkKQxS5y4hvxV+6bDgKelA=
From: janaiyengar <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2124/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Strengthen 2119 language around tokens. (#2124)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c11c68f1869c_37d33fd08dcd45b81236af"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: janaiyengar
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: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 02:40:18 -0000

janaiyengar commented on this pull request.

> @@ -1610,7 +1610,7 @@ A resumption token SHOULD be constructed to be easily distinguishable from
 tokens that are sent in Retry packets as they are carried in the same field.
 If the client has a token received in a NEW_TOKEN frame on a previous connection
-to what it believes to be the same server, it can include that value in the
+to what it believes to be the same server, it SHOULD include that value in the

... or it dropped its store of tokens. SHOULD is useful in encouraging clients to do the performant thing -- use tokens unless they really can't.

> @@ -1627,7 +1627,7 @@ interface.  A client needs to start the connection process over if it migrates
 prior to completing the handshake.
 When a server receives an Initial packet with an address validation token, it
-SHOULD attempt to validate it, unless it has already completed address
+MUST attempt to validate it, unless it has already completed address

There's an "unless" clause that captures the cases where a server won't validate, AFAICT. I'm ok with MUST here.

Also, the "it" is ambiguous. I would change the sentence to ".... MUST attempt to validate the token"

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