Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Incorrect values for Required Insert Count (#3305)

afrind <> Tue, 14 January 2020 18:51 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5259B120B19 for <>; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 10:51:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.999 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_32=0.001, 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 YwPa042v7TgT for <>; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 10:51:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA580120B05 for <>; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 10:51:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F1756A0A70 for <>; Tue, 14 Jan 2020 10:51:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1579027886; bh=y7Qd7aJjoAmpSmsLqUZCumDhi+WBRYdJuJr0kPxneB4=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=yEvHpCJt1QJBpPc7BWpCtrqUaZJCIlfXwQfSEeTH3QxByCGaI0Me/qv99bN4GaM4T UDMeH2ERABX1iOx3mcaqnLAAnAbGgF4yk/HPcm7LB+nrBE06AKPI4VQGqzicEBPtRb VF+7oV2NKLwNynMZSRrWAGvfZKyG950jTtxYWWVU=
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 10:51:26 -0800
From: afrind <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3305/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Incorrect values for Required Insert Count (#3305)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e1e0dae3052c_3fac3fc9a7ecd96017956c"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: afrind
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 18:51:35 -0000

I feel like the draft explicitly says this is an error.  Here's the current text:

> When processing header blocks, the decoder expects the Required Insert Count to exactly match the value defined in Section 2.1.3. If it encounters a smaller value than expected, it MUST treat this as a connection error of type HTTP_QPACK_DECOMPRESSION_FAILED; see Section 2.2.3. If it encounters a larger value than expected, it MAY treat this as a connection error of type HTTP_QPACK_DECOMPRESSION_FAILED.

Which part is obtuse?  Should I replace '...the value defined in Section 2.1.3.'  and '...smaller/larger than expected' with a restatement of the expected values?  I'm pretty sure it used to say that and we changed it to this.  Or would moving it to another section make it easier to find?  

Regarding whether this is a functional or performance bug, I expect many implementations won't parse the header block until the RIC is met, so the encoder can cause the decoder to block a stream indefinitely.  This can lead to other poor compression performance effects, but I don't think it can cause an actual deadlock on any request other than the one with the bad RIC, which is the encoder's fault anyways.  Maybe a security consideration recommending timeouts for this case?  

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