IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Use a "stream" for transmitting CIDs (#1826)

Marten Seemann <notifications@github.com> Tue, 02 October 2018 19:22 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 E63BD130EF5 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 12:22:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.456
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.456 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.456, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-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 GWd4aVLpkPqQ for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 12:22:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-2.smtp.github.com (out-2.smtp.github.com [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 29CA4130DC2 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 12:22:58 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2018 12:22:57 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1538508177; bh=NB2iMBSd6RSRMhvhLDIt99PzSm/859jQfyHYz1r1h9g=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=blxYhfu0HNjKBNv6830gA44+qYrgQByc6y+5WayC94UkdVxwFPBrvnOgzGydkAr9M Ww3XX+0opLFwS/TjPQ7xYSh21BkGna7h0HZ2b9+ZXh71nSqRyimHmKpxWad1nBWCjP UECsNLszxPWxA4NfGjr6t6WXB+5NNpAJxZrL5MTQ=
From: Marten Seemann <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab79b93913e35a1c76841c1e12ffa6314b8e2a47aa92cf0000000117cb879192a169ce15d12f59@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1826/426398819@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1826@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1826@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Use a "stream" for transmitting CIDs (#1826)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5bb3c59129c8c_260f3f9bcf6d45c0155867"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: marten-seemann
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/oSJM3rsBGwE8JiDCRsBCbl52mY0>
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: Tue, 02 Oct 2018 19:23:00 -0000

> Without using a "stream", you'd need to do book-keeping of the CID-sequence number relation being received by the NEW_CID frame, because the frames can arrive out-of-order. "Stream" guarantees in-order-delivery and therefore you only need to maintain a counter.

At least in my implementation, I'd have to write a separate implementation of that CID "stream", unless we reuse an actual QUIC stream, so as far as I can see, it wouldn't make a big difference.

> Not carrying NEW_CID and RETIRE_CID as a "message" on top of "streams" also means that you would have a retransmission logic specific to those frames.

Why is that? They'd just be normal retransmittable frames, wouldn't they?

-- 
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/1826#issuecomment-426398819

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email