Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify whether QUIC packets with no payload are acceptable (#1745)
Nick Banks <notifications@github.com> Fri, 14 September 2018 18:51 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 A76F2130DCB for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 11:51:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.01
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] 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 1ufzhNhZFBjC for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 11:51:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-10.smtp.github.com (out-10.smtp.github.com [192.30.254.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D43FF128CFD for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 11:51:02 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2018 11:51:02 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1536951062; bh=z9ZkWYSMd5kJ9Bcy+POU9REpin3b0K6kuT80HvHhBBQ=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=d0udJUtrgGhS78GbfdwFxtkrcabbSgQmmHu2KiICb0QCVq0ONbUqxn7b2WWsUA0pt hFahT3B8mAOjJcFzRZ6hJrbd7ByQf2w8y3iVN7ck+5Fw/f8he7p0njQqP05S42jEPi DA2bpdnkcq0tpPWbMxJKM4IUxuUupUwhENrDmEv4=
From: Nick Banks <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab0f79c32264bce7ee9285090514b57aeb1da6fe9b92cf0000000117b3c51592a169ce157b79fc@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1745/421451607@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1745@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1745@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify whether QUIC packets with no payload are acceptable (#1745)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5b9c0316a79d_74e13f99de6d45b89545"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: nibanks
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/cgoRv9byu_O7eDxRf7VI0ksHsIM>
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: Fri, 14 Sep 2018 18:51:05 -0000
I agree they are harmless and I would prefer not to need to add extra logic to my implementation to check for empty packets. My vote is to allow them. -- 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/issues/1745#issuecomment-421451607
- [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify whether QUIC packets… ianswett
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify whether QUIC pac… Nick Banks
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify whether QUIC pac… Marten Seemann
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify whether QUIC pac… ianswett
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify whether QUIC pac… Ryan Hamilton
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify whether QUIC pac… Marten Seemann
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify whether QUIC pac… MikkelFJ
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify whether QUIC pac… Ryan Hamilton
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify whether QUIC pac… ianswett
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify whether QUIC pac… MikkelFJ
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify whether QUIC pac… Martin Thomson
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify whether QUIC pac… Martin Thomson
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify whether QUIC pac… Igor Lubashev