Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] enforce the active_connection_id_limit (#3201)

[Eric Kinnear <[e-mail]>]

erickinnear commented on this pull request.



> @@ -999,8 +999,10 @@ retired are considered active; any active connection ID can be used.
 An endpoint SHOULD ensure that its peer has a sufficient number of available and
 unused connection IDs.  Endpoints store received connection IDs for future use
 and advertise the number of connection IDs they are willing to store with the
-active_connection_id_limit transport parameter.  An endpoint SHOULD NOT provide
-more connection IDs than the peer's limit.
+active_connection_id_limit transport parameter.  An endpoint MUST NOT provide
+more connection IDs than the peer's limit.  An endpoint that receives more
+connection IDs than its advertised active_connection_id_limit MUST close the
+connection with an error of type CONNECTION_ID_LIMIT_ERROR.

I'm not sure that I'm against the SHOULD, but I think the idea behind enforcing this was that an endpoint would indeed now need to store every CID it receives, and if it's not willing to store X amount, then it shouldn't have advertised a limit of X.

And even if you *still* didn't store them all, you technically don't need to store them to keep track of how many you've been issued, which you'll probably need in order to cope with getting Retire Prior To anyways.

-- 
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/3201#discussion_r347274181