Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Limit RCID state (#3547)

Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com> Sat, 28 March 2020 01:54 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 C55523A0C44 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 18:54:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.554
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.554 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, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 zKcVmM2TkTOq for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 18:54:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-7.smtp.github.com (out-7.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C1973A08A2 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 18:54:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-6349a71.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-6349a71.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.18.20]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5466C2C118A for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 18:54:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1585360449; bh=HE0uOSmNVVfp5dU/VWo6cRcZhJelkDvBQyMqLmdwwto=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=eLwyM3IlJS0McGQIjLCcYG69P2wk3nSlhfQcagukCE9tHOBjPqeJtEjcplUgQFsyh XhMn5Sg5u1qfukUz/nL9AO9BV+iCWw4AQM274X0B4iMM/XYz+ljAn6cd3PLP99M/bI e5h3FFg3KqFwHSTbXfNzSli2hQ0vUtEpL4aSd3NM=
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 18:54:09 -0700
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK6EKO6QB3QUWFY4NNF4RKHUDEVBNHHCGFYIAU@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3547/c605377813@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3547@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3547@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Limit RCID state (#3547)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e7eae4144523_44ba3f811cacd9601095bc"; 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
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/bje_Cdwem_1DIcR3ZZ8O1I5l2BQ>
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: Sat, 28 Mar 2020 01:54:12 -0000

@nibanks I think this PR has been an attempt to clarify the "leaky" approach, that tries to clarify the amount of state that an endpoint should retain. There are indeed discussion of what that amount is, but I think it is essential to have such detailed discussion on the PR in order to determine clarify what a particular approach would look like.

To paraphrase, I think we are making process on this PR to describe a specific approach, if we are to consider something different, I think that discussion should happen on the issue (and emerge as a separate PR).

-- 
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/3547#issuecomment-605377813