Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] A fixed transport parameter profile is legitimate (#3429)

Mike Bishop <> Fri, 21 February 2020 19:34 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BF4412006B for <>; Fri, 21 Feb 2020 11:34:25 -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 SbsT39Caul4O for <>; Fri, 21 Feb 2020 11:34:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2833D12003E for <>; Fri, 21 Feb 2020 11:34:23 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2020 11:34:22 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1582313662; bh=lQx4ERwb+UBbeD2o2FwzyoTlYGI4ekptx/dMoT1V1k8=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=14q7BRFoKdn0hmGekxteBUM9lyMw6fRJwNt05U66bDf5ODR6fF2r3hV7Xqh72O059 D8WaThoY3QdZzZbQV4UCRBFD7Kym/C6FqzTrMU7wGbKziqa6ATUlsS2LwILx7rkD+U GNFFBWrDQDZ2xqiPmLYezykjBjWuv8gDD5fwk+As=
From: Mike Bishop <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3429/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] A fixed transport parameter profile is legitimate (#3429)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e5030be513f0_72173fcda2ecd95c25698"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: MikeBishop
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: Fri, 21 Feb 2020 19:34:25 -0000

I don't know that there's much here to "take on" beyond clarifying what our design principles are, and maybe writing those down somewhere for designers of future transport parameters.  The principle here is that TPs are independent declarations by each side, not negotiations.

I've noticed as we get further and further into this process, we have a number of principles which haven't been written down which have guided our design -- and we keep revisiting them because only the resulting design is explicit.  I'm wondering if those principles belong... somewhere.  An appendix, a published draft, etc. even if not enshrined in an RFC.

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