IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com> Thu, 02 April 2020 01:13 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 1FBC63A07E1 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 18:13:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.482
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.482 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_24=1.618, 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 DOu5OTz_ZB6X for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 18:13:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-20.smtp.github.com (out-20.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.203]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B38F23A07E0 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 18:13:02 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2020 18:13:01 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1585789981; bh=K9dG/2//bqx8Dix4sRrKCl0nrOPDHyhBXg/Lt65cgL0=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=tztuDV3P26kZ76F17GT8vjBHHqmG1mvy2EABUBtHpVIOv8fqPnBlXy7hUuqzCoQEP 25H1ib1LS5wZ2Tvo/dm+dDg5cDsZLKnUrOrbdJ/BUrD86MwrahbDmR/90izA3JleuA sPsGzVrNoHx9MqD2tXqXxSyFD07OtG1TGvHBRCFQ=
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK24KA477GDWQVQT3YV4SEOR3EVBNHHCGFYIAU@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/review/386049964@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_5e853c1d9ffdf_168d3fd0ea4cd95c73447"; 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/fDEOSqhmSlHt_wPo27JbermsDTQ>
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: Thu, 02 Apr 2020 01:13:04 -0000

@kazuho commented on this pull request.



> +An endpoint SHOULD limit the number of in flight RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frames
+to bound the necessary state. In order to minimize delay in common situations,
+the limit on the number of in flight RETIRE_CONNECTION_IDs SHOULD be at least
+the active_connection_id_limit. An endpoint MAY choose to treat having too many
+connection IDs in need of retirement as a connection error of type
+CONNECTION_ID_LIMIT_ERROR.

This suggestion looks good to me. I think we might want to clarify why the recommendation is at least twice (e.g., so that endpoints can track retirements it issued and those requested by the peer even under packet loss), but that's merely an editorial preference.

-- 
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#discussion_r401998245

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email