Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation fields can't move or change (#498)
Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com> Wed, 17 May 2017 14:19 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 7C87712FC16 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 May 2017 07:19:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-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 YIlhzUwwyaPN for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 May 2017 07:19:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext2.iad.github.net [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 361EB12D574 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 May 2017 07:11:18 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 17 May 2017 07:11:17 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1495030277; bh=XNFxZO2Y+EJqW5foltp0sUn4sN7v7TlRtuiJ60NAWQA=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=2JASUsvUrqU+uAFM62hSP2jwQc9kuT4xg4QGIkQsznnT8jMWSYXm20IXTIOh+er6f imRbACX+2jo/BrGNe05EKSrV+o/h8E65BTGKgu2OONUahbtEqBF8kLgIjNPDk3XEwI 62ccZQA/jVNLQXH52MBQXg/99VZJxltDTJKXoxyQ=
From: Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab763dcceb778e83d3d6dfea94bb4b7280b262b84b92cf0000000115341c0592a169ce0d7b2095@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/498/review/38679146@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/498@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/498@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation fields can't move or change (#498)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_591c5a0536df0_55bc3f9a0e0d9c3c1025a1"; 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
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/o8_u-9j9ZsGBJJPxlSpjzNMGpAk>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 17 May 2017 14:19:08 -0000
martinthomson commented on this pull request. > @@ -1131,6 +1131,13 @@ client MUST terminate with a QUIC_VERSION_NEGOTIATION_MISMATCH error code if version negotiation occurred but it would have selected a different version based on the value of the supported_versions list. +The position and size of the version validation fields in the transport +parameters MUST NOT change between different versions of QUIC. If a version of +QUIC needs to define a new format for transport parameters, it MUST define and +use a new TLS extension rather than redefine the layout of the existing @ianswett, I've read this suggestion several times and I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you are trying to say. Can you explain your alternative design in more detail? -- 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/498#discussion_r117011750
- [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation fields ca… Martin Thomson
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation field… ianswett
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation field… Martin Thomson
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation field… ianswett
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation field… MikkelFJ
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation field… Martin Thomson
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation field… ianswett
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation field… Martin Thomson
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation field… Victor Vasiliev
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation field… Martin Thomson
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation field… ianswett
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation field… Mike Bishop
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation field… ianswett
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation field… janaiyengar
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation field… Martin Thomson
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation field… Martin Thomson
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation field… ianswett
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation field… janaiyengar
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Version validation field… Martin Thomson