Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Mention every Transport Parameter in section on values for 0-RTT (#3756)

David Schinazi <> Tue, 16 June 2020 04:35 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7B533A0966 for <>; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 21:35:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.483
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.483 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZvokI45O8YhN for <>; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 21:35:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DDD33A0963 for <>; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 21:35:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E45C48C01BC for <>; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 21:35:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1592282104; bh=dGhJ0lSQlH51pEpLXKpI9bbMwDFCiqhJtAPePJDk3YE=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=j1dh+YyEStbNWqAAiAlK1/p98vRCQ4GzBuloKW7M8NcS6LVOZZSM8Q6YYcNYsdjIG 3/Q09AYD/vvl9ZkjerKzVbAvt+/1t0C6qJB7hli/xg1sXjFqhWOrhJJN8GozPLsVt2 aMsXMMF/B028SiXk4tgBKhgibCAG5abpRFAVddtw=
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 21:35:04 -0700
From: David Schinazi <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3756/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Mention every Transport Parameter in section on values for 0-RTT (#3756)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5ee84bf8d501b_4b833fb03e6cd968787c8"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: DavidSchinazi
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 04:35:07 -0000

@DavidSchinazi commented on this pull request.

> @@ -1749,6 +1749,16 @@ values for 0-RTT.  This includes initial_max_data and either
 initial_max_streams_bidi and initial_max_stream_data_bidi_remote, or
 initial_max_streams_uni and initial_max_stream_data_uni.
+When accepting 0-RTT data, a server may set values for the following parameters
+that are smaller than the values remembered by the client. Because the previous
+values set for these parameters do not affect what values can be set when
+accepting 0-RTT data, it is not necessary that the server be able to recover the
+values it previously sent.
+* max_idle_timeout
+* max_udp_payload_size

Can someone provide an example of how remembering max_udp_payload_size can lead to an optimization? I’m failing to see how remembering it can provide benefits

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: