Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Rewrite text about Version Negotiation (#1039)

[MikkelFJ <[e-mail]>]

mikkelfj commented on this pull request.



> -A packet that uses the short header could be associated with an existing
-connection with an incomplete cryptographic handshake.  Such a packet could be a
-valid packet that has been reordered with respect to the long-form packets that
-will complete the cryptographic handshake.  This might happen after the final
-set of cryptographic handshake messages from either peer.  These packets are
-expected to be correlated with a connection using the tuple of IP addresses and
-ports.  Packets that might be reordered in this fashion SHOULD be buffered in
-anticipation of the handshake completing.
-
-0-RTT packets might be received prior to a Client Initial packet at a server.
-If the version of these packets is acceptable to the server, it MAY buffer these
-packets in anticipation of receiving a reordered Client Initial packet.
+with an existing connection, or - for servers - potentially create a new
+connection.
+
+Hosts handle packets that can be associated with an existing connection

I don't think it is possible to entirely ignore at tuple even when given an ID. A host may assume an ID is approximately (modulo long time) unique when originating from one source. One peer does not control the ID. Internally it makes sense to hash the tuple with connection ID for lookup. However, it may be sufficient to require the ID be used, since an implementation may decide how tolerant it wants to be agasint collisions.

-- 
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/1039#discussion_r161797999