Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Early CONNECTION_CLOSE fixes (#3440)

Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com> Wed, 04 March 2020 01:50 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@github.com>
X-Original-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 031F43A0AC1 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 17:50:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.098 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, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=github.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OSOib-9LGigk for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 17:50:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-5.smtp.github.com (out-5.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6304B3A0ABF for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 17:50:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from github-lowworker-d93c4b6.va3-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-d93c4b6.va3-iad.github.net [10.48.17.47]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F26A196049C for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 17:50:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1583286647; bh=I4mBfU/ztwkEayClnjPn2krDEr1RPTWo33Dde3mtkGA=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=J3/sHJSsjTBvyaXGgEabCu2FfvWCEf2vlfeVnj/NnU0rzamx3YAcm0Ku4cNmuqh4c 3xhcfECEC9ME7otSm7XfUBBG4cryvnS0FgFJwzmYZFdjSCeSbuxyWmP38w0kfpDsEg frPQ9aetc+FIF/qfAD8D+Pqtc7kd+496Eyi9zB1E=
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2020 17:50:47 -0800
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK24CJ6YJWKDHLOW7AV4NLVHPEVBNHHCC4MTBY@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3440/review/368453839@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3440@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3440@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Early CONNECTION_CLOSE fixes (#3440)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e5f0977e3c53_61ca3fa31e0cd964230694"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: kazuho
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/m0b9Mz8M1SQQO5vhHqF9LqnwzB0>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <quic-issues.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic-issues/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic-issues@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2020 01:50:51 -0000

kazuho commented on this pull request.

LGTM modulo the editorial concern below (sorry to report things one by one).

>  
-Some frames are prohibited in different encryption levels, others cannot be
-sent. The rules here generalize those of TLS, in that frames associated with
-establishing the connection can usually appear at any encryption level, whereas
-those associated with transferring data can only appear in the 0-RTT and 1-RTT
-encryption levels:
+Some frames are prohibited in different packet number spaces. The rules here
+generalize those of TLS, in that frames associated with establishing the
+connection can usually appear in packets in any packet number space, whereas
+those associated with transferring data can only appear in the application
+packet number space:

Looking at [section 12.3 of the transport draft](https://quicwg.org/base-drafts/draft-ietf-quic-transport.html#section-12.3), I think the term we use is "application data (packet number) space"?

This comment applies to "application packet number space" used elsewhere in this PR too.

-- 
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/3440#pullrequestreview-368453839