IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] are flow control frames really idempotent? (#1612)

Subodh Iyengar <notifications@github.com> Tue, 31 July 2018 15:27 UTC

Return-Path: <bounces+848413-a050-quic-issues=ietf.org@sgmail.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 E4D98130F15 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Jul 2018 08:27:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.11
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.11 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] 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 Wrn_-JysI-tp for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Jul 2018 08:27:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from o11.sgmail.github.com (o11.sgmail.github.com [167.89.101.202]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56482130F11 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Jul 2018 08:27:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; h=from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=YexUU+kpadpwwx1uSMYumPZ+PdA=; b=r8Yx+N2kslSvcv1F 2p2qYyvHiOA5yB+OWJT4lBtfcR6Utz13t50N9LLwCA2ItX+XdQQOwsHN9EHR3J9B e820LXrj0vdDppmuBAdEzdOH+yNcQ/OeXe8SB/ixfwy12ggsRGIMeCKJsFr2Z7ss z8H9+u9N7s/Uz3de+iaHV6PJhjM=
Received: by filter1567p1mdw1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter1567p1mdw1-17824-5B607FF0-7 2018-07-31 15:27:44.529507804 +0000 UTC m=+493140.134462535
Received: from github-lowworker7-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (unknown [192.30.252.47]) by ismtpd0010p1iad2.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id 3hLvh_PgQXSdiLbsX2qyLA for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Jul 2018 15:27:44.503 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from github.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by github-lowworker7-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AC5BA6B18 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Jul 2018 08:27:44 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2018 15:27:44 +0000
From: Subodh Iyengar <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab0e2ff55b964bd604abd2843c66ab9cc7e8465c6492cf00000001177841f092a169ce149fd7cc@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1612/409261863@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1612@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1612@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] are flow control frames really idempotent? (#1612)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5b607ff068fb1_453e3fa2decbe628389870"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: siyengar
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak1WvFIkLCAMBrtrTCA60XbRSuCbRdTNXzS+r/ BuWssjMIuAKosvhiOUscQlE8BxQv+pbtqKFYAfjkCOwtbRiTsbPwl6YFjusIU53YZG3uN5O0O5RP94 WL3ZD7XkmhVKFWvbGWxJ0vtEhPSd8qes3U3IBQijfqZpfO6R1wzt1rHze4LnLaH6HZRx89RRV5IWs5 g=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/nbaeYpBth_U2GMyYOkbPH5ozbK4>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Tue, 31 Jul 2018 15:27:48 -0000

@dtikhonov sorry it's not those exact words, here's the exact wording: https://quicwg.org/base-drafts/draft-ietf-quic-transport.html#flow-control

> A receiver MUST NOT renege on an advertisement; that is, once a receiver advertises an offset, it MUST NOT subsequently advertise a smaller offset. A sender could receive MAX_DATA or MAX_STREAM_DATA frames out of order; a sender MUST therefore ignore any flow control offset that does not move the window forward.

the operative words being "MUST NOT subsequently advertise a smaller offset"

-- 
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/issues/1612#issuecomment-409261863

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status