Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Remembering transport parameters (#3434)

Martin Thomson <> Mon, 10 February 2020 21:29 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABFF7120861 for <>; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 13:29:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.382
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.382 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_24=1.618, 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 iUvZZS5XUWka for <>; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 13:29:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DACB2120858 for <>; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 13:29:20 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2020 13:29:19 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1581370159; bh=a8zyvbpOGwnW+w7jhx8wDNAiF0ravF/WEBRRdgjV7X8=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=F2BlrhUg+V8uoWQGEoXb4xn662iToDYZ0XAoxt5JUl0ZJxarkK1cslqbZBsZwBUFF p+B0SIhbUKQlOnfypEYENcoXobucOMY453UoLkJ3JV4RsrprQIexzeH+NqapWemAjo 5GkV5I0RXmOFuOtW7aYPXEZLK+X+HYzDfxqmLtcs=
From: Martin Thomson <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3434/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Remembering transport parameters (#3434)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e41cb2f90faa_432f3fcca7acd95c1707db"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: martinthomson
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: Mon, 10 Feb 2020 21:29:23 -0000

Yeah, I was writing based on memory, and you are right that the text strongly skews toward remembering by default.

However, I don't agree that reducing `max_packet_size` is safe.  Unless you are suggesting that 0-RTT has to use the minimum size always.  What we have now is that clients and servers have to remember `max_packet_size`, but they aren't specifically required to avoid clients violating new restrictions.  That's weird.

I would suggest then that we make this editorial in order to capture the aforementioned principle and then I will open another issue to track `max_packet_size` constraints.

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