IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Limit RCID state (#3547)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Mon, 30 March 2020 23:29 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 1D5F53A159C for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 16:29:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=0.7, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 BFFaJGSES6hh for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 16:29:53 -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 E6A113A159A for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 16:29:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-e8b54ca.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-e8b54ca.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.23.39]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10BDB1C02F3 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 16:29:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1585610992; bh=jCBVvBJJ6LPmF+pOBKlzzJFzPzvtDyjOaHHdiBt3io4=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=o+Api/BZFwSSwBC0I8CONzjPdSdpMXsop3/CYpce1F5LLeWzh5ekdllHO9ILeKDJ2 KFBA9+kESPcZ6glw/9x389YTKNhrKLHw4eC3OsREvtujXUmizNtPyek4AkqJ0Y3aI7 ImvOONiAGRfKOvhnllNck0lmNRm5c07qmoSU1brA=
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 16:29:52 -0700
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK7L7V43LF3EGBUI3PN4RZQ67EVBNHHCGFYIAU@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3547/review/384303188@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3547@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3547@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Limit RCID state (#3547)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e8280f01b42_62543f80c24cd95c48311e"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ianswett
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/pPuJUuFJF1TwUD9dQefwO90E_-k>
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: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 23:29:54 -0000

@ianswett commented on this pull request.



> +RETIRE_CONNECTION_IDs SHOULD be at least the active_connection_id_limit.  If the
+number of outstanding RETIRE_CONNECTION_IDs exceeds twice the
+active_connection_id_limit, the connection MAY be closed with a connection error
+of type CONNECTION_ID_LIMIT_ERROR.

Assuming we move forward with this PR, this is what I intend our implementation to do.  I realize that 'A server's gotta do what a server's gotta do' but I'd prefer an explicit expectation for ease of debugging.

-- 
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/3547#discussion_r400554936

v2.8.10 | Report a Bug | By Email