Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 05:40:28 -0700
From: Lars Eggert <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts
 <reply+0166e4ab329a5cfb1cf57f317f76f2994f6f0e2f860a8bbd92cf00000001170416bc92a169ce131475f5@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1336/386588885@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1336@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1336@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Consistent presenting Connection ID in
 packet or frame (#1336)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="--==_mimepart_5aec54bc55314_255d2aff7ea0cf503198bf";
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/pB1KCHtFLQozaIbuvBMp4Yre5cs>


----==_mimepart_5aec54bc55314_255d2aff7ea0cf503198bf
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Regarding "when you expect the 4-tuple to identify the connection" - what do you do if you have omitted the CID for a connection, but that expectation ends up being wrong?

Not being able to accept additional connections on a 4-tuple (with non-omitted CIDs) IMO severely limits the possibility to use omitted CIDs, to the point where we might as well ditch them completely.

-- 
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/1336#issuecomment-386588885
----==_mimepart_5aec54bc55314_255d2aff7ea0cf503198bf
Content-Type: text/html;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p>Regarding "when you expect the 4-tuple to identify the connection" - w=
hat do you do if you have omitted the CID for a connection, but that expe=
ctation ends up being wrong?</p>
<p>Not being able to accept additional connections on a 4-tuple (with non=
-omitted CIDs) IMO severely limits the possibility to use omitted CIDs, t=
o the point where we might as well ditch them completely.</p>

<p style=3D"font-size:small;-webkit-text-size-adjust:none;color:#666;">&m=
dash;<br />You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thre=
ad.<br />Reply to this email directly, <a href=3D"https://github.com/quic=
wg/base-drafts/issues/1336#issuecomment-386588885">view it on GitHub</a>,=
 or <a href=3D"https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AWbkqz7H=
2thSeL4jL8tVF6ABSzOzubHzks5tvEw8gaJpZM4Tx5-h">mute the thread</a>.<img sr=
c=3D"https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AWbkqwsMJswfnUxEMrWZsUu63k0o=
NBECks5tvEw8gaJpZM4Tx5-h.gif" height=3D"1" width=3D"1" alt=3D"" /></p>
<div itemscope itemtype=3D"http://schema.org/EmailMessage">
<div itemprop=3D"action" itemscope itemtype=3D"http://schema.org/ViewActi=
on">
  <link itemprop=3D"url" href=3D"https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/is=
sues/1336#issuecomment-386588885"></link>
  <meta itemprop=3D"name" content=3D"View Issue"></meta>
</div>
<meta itemprop=3D"description" content=3D"View this Issue on GitHub"></me=
ta>
</div>

<script type=3D"application/json" data-scope=3D"inboxmarkup">{"api_versio=
n":"1.0","publisher":{"api_key":"05dde50f1d1a384dd78767c55493e4bb","name"=
:"GitHub"},"entity":{"external_key":"github/quicwg/base-drafts","title":"=
quicwg/base-drafts","subtitle":"GitHub repository","main_image_url":"http=
s://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/143418/17495839/a5054eac-5d88-11e6=
-95fc-7290892c7bb5.png","avatar_image_url":"https://cloud.githubuserconte=
nt.com/assets/143418/15842166/7c72db34-2c0b-11e6-9aed-b52498112777.png","=
action":{"name":"Open in GitHub","url":"https://github.com/quicwg/base-dr=
afts"}},"updates":{"snippets":[{"icon":"PERSON","message":"@larseggert in=
 #1336: Regarding \"when you expect the 4-tuple to identify the connectio=
n\" - what do you do if you have omitted the CID for a connection, but th=
at expectation ends up being wrong?\r\n\r\nNot being able to accept addit=
ional connections on a 4-tuple (with non-omitted CIDs) IMO severely limit=
s the possibility to use omitted CIDs, to the point where we might as wel=
l ditch them completely."}],"action":{"name":"View Issue","url":"https://=
github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1336#issuecomment-386588885"}}}</scr=
ipt>=

----==_mimepart_5aec54bc55314_255d2aff7ea0cf503198bf--