Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Padding outside QUIC packet (#3333)

Kazuho Oku <> Tue, 14 January 2020 14:42 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F6021200E9 for <>; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 06:42:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.382
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.382 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_24=1.618, 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 enEcuEib9AsQ for <>; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 06:42:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85ABE12004F for <>; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 06:42:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCA9BA03AD for <>; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 06:42:40 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1579012960; bh=KNdIn6xYjzuEIDuL1nUu1DGNNBXTwIV7B/oZNEOTHK0=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=aaQq8r9a9hjp8EzAsGVpVDrKvFyl/D5BADBpMwL0R1Dv9fTL4BLctDIK7IMpanr+P p4DZO9u/fVEX+WM13Y+LqIwcNELH3zWsm42qIkEjNhFPXfptcEx2+ApDL0/v//NtME +VHrtJANZLrCLVY79fTLm+LBDNbHPxIfbXaWncJM=
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 06:42:40 -0800
From: Kazuho Oku <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3333/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Padding outside QUIC packet (#3333)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e1dd360bddb0_8f63fbe0fecd96835048c"; 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, 14 Jan 2020 14:42:49 -0000

@martinthomson Thank you for opening a new issue. I share the view that the issue deserves its own.

Going back to the original topic, I was a bit confused in my previous comment, but I think that my argument still holds; we should recommend padding inside QUIC packet, because CC happens at QUIC packet layer, and the size of padding affects CC. I am afraid that the specification would become needlessly complex, if we are to suggest that padding outside of QUIC packet is a possibility.

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