Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Disagreement about CID Liveness (#1495)

[Kazuho Oku <[e-mail]>]

@MikeBishop 
> Possible solution: We might need to have the side forgetting CIDs explicitly inform the peer that it will no longer use or accept CIDs older than a certain cutoff. You have to remember old CIDs you've issued until this frame is acknowledged; upon receipt of this frame, you no longer consider the stateless reset tokens valid.

FWIW, an alternative approach will be to let each endpoint declare the maximum number of spare CIDs that the endpoint is going to keep.

An endpoint can request new connection IDs when the number of spares goes below the threshold that has been advertised by the peer, either by sending a `REQUEST_CONNECTION_ID` frame (which is proposed in #1496) or defining offering of CID as a reciprocal action (i.e. a client who wants more CID requests that by sending a new connection ID to the server; IIRC @martinthomson suggested that approach somewhere).

-- 
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/1495#issuecomment-401226177