[quicwg/base-drafts] qpack: successful header block processing as opposed to what? (#1586)
Dmitri Tikhonov <notifications@github.com> Wed, 18 July 2018 21:35 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 BC6F9131066 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 14:35:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.009
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.009 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 svXz6Lwu-a4H for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 14:35:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-3.smtp.github.com (out-3.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49FCB130DEB for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 14:35:39 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 14:35:38 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1531949738; bh=w2aPTC3Q1V9tM3tHmK7R1XIb7POEOqpM4F7XD7SrITo=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=felWlnO/kn5hlioW5au+E6vlilfmm3VseUOKPghz4wg4LnjLr1GPau1naRJc0YGNj Rto2j+y9fNNz2wMs6EiPkCyWuhww7L0kBcgGQ7dbQfrwzTSOQMFMVqmbZVrn246zfN aeweKajtBYw++0Xe3BkKOwKqUE8dVzJZ9tj7ulhs=
From: Dmitri Tikhonov <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab1339cf52965715c3e750efe4c578d6d455fb705e92cf00000001176774aa92a169ce146a2565@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1586@github.com>
Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] qpack: successful header block processing as opposed to what? (#1586)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5b4fb2aa7dd60_5ef63fb9c86bef887029b4"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: dtikhonov
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/eEfLQ5g-S4e7h7sK9DkVKG7NYS8>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 21:35:42 -0000
"Successful" processing is mentioned twice in the draft (see State Synchronization). This may raise the question on the part of the reader [1]: _As opposed to an unsuccessful processing?_ Since an unsuccessful decoding of a header block results in a QPACK error, we should drop the "successful" part. If successful is used to mean "processing the header block to the end so that all references in it can be decremented," we should use "complete," e.g. "header block was processed completely." My vote would be just to drop "successful" for good. 1. The mental load required to grok an RFC should be reduced. The fewer questions the reader may ask himself, the better. -- 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/1586
- [quicwg/base-drafts] qpack: successful header blo… Dmitri Tikhonov
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] qpack: successful header… afrind
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] qpack: successful header… Dmitri Tikhonov
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] qpack: successful header… afrind
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] qpack: successful header… afrind