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

ekr <> Tue, 12 May 2020 01:35 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B476C3A0E2E for <>; Mon, 11 May 2020 18:35:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.652
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.652 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.173, 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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 hlnfKHsy41qP for <>; Mon, 11 May 2020 18:35:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B6D33A0E2A for <>; Mon, 11 May 2020 18:35:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 886051C0A19 for <>; Mon, 11 May 2020 18:35:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1589247330; bh=bHaYs1FpKIeD111KmG87eR6iok9TCVcBV2bmt4XYQ8Q=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=lSaIyd16lS3Ky0bzy3Yw4XPpZ1W2ERIEXOc2FV5xGxnS7kdO99JXVuxkSmnoFotBc PeVptIpMs6L+xibG2XVcZBoit28trlGBdI2SH6O5pEwbkVVWVxKBLrV6ftUIGxX+dY BaeuxWK/nyWQYYFVJJy0ojpT/0XO84A0+CTeBjBA=
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 18:35:30 -0700
From: ekr <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3547/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Limit RCID state (#3547)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5eb9fd62779a2_22903f872f2cd9681061e4"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ekr
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, 12 May 2020 01:35:33 -0000

@ekr commented on this pull request.

> @@ -1069,6 +1069,15 @@ to cease using the connection IDs when requested can result in connection
 failures, as the issuing endpoint might be unable to continue using the
 connection IDs with the active connection.
+An endpoint SHOULD limit the state it commits to retiring connection IDs using
+RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID by limiting the number of connection IDs that it tracks for
+retirement to at least twice the active_connection_id_limit. An endpoint MUST
+NOT forget a connection ID without retiring it, though MAY choose to treat
+having too many connection IDs in need of retirement as a connection error of

Instead of "too many" how about "having connection IDs in need of retirement that exceed this limit..."  or "in excess of this limit". That way we don't have ambiguity about the referent of "too many"

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