Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] explain that and endpoint cannot expect the delivery of the peer's settings (5fadbbb)

Kazuho Oku <> Tue, 27 August 2019 00:28 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A7C2120812 for <>; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:28:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8 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_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 Cn4-I_bYZw9j for <>; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:28:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07C08120818 for <>; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:28:37 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:28:35 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1566865715; bh=3wpz+Af70e/vw+YENeHvTAIFtXoNDZLscAIiXcr41ZU=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=SY1RqcgBpLpNe0ChWGnzJtjk+0BGEQ7qNch7DTD/Fmdz1DLXs7lRVKYH/BNSREMZg GTvtOcqcGhJoOUUf1JdirJWQOBDFmoAqxbKrKbxWEczZd7b6oOBuV/Luj7LDQvySIq 4w9CVp7nMSkMcPyNXpObRMEarz5DGBb8V7k8Dd1Q=
From: Kazuho Oku <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/commit/5fadbbbff7a5e566a2c951376be7999aca2c7edb/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/commit/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/commit/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] explain that and endpoint cannot expect the delivery of the peer's settings (5fadbbb)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d647933e208a_74433f7f34ccd95c177853"; 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, 27 Aug 2019 00:28:38 -0000

> I think the situation @kazuho is trying to describe is that, for whatever reason, the SETTINGS frame isn't transmitted until the sender has something _else_ to send on the control stream. Since that is required to come after SETTINGS, it finally sends SETTINGS then.

Yes, that is what this sentence tried to state. OTOH, I am somewhat negative against allowing such postponement, as @martinthomson says.

The contract should either be "SHOULD send" & "MUST NOT block on receipt" or "MUST send" & "SHOULD NOT block on receipt". At the moment, #2986 takes the latter approach.

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