Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Explicitly allow discard of packets <40 bytes (#2864)

Mike Bishop <> Wed, 17 July 2019 13:39 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E7F6120403 for <>; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 06:39:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.999 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, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 XF1u7OaVn2kS for <>; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 06:39:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7D2D120400 for <>; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 06:39:20 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 06:39:19 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1563370759; bh=dfdAW1nzHlf90mNs7BdlTxSKiWU3tUR+uCPv9YFcLSY=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=QRGQfjB5d7ldo81G8NuZMR5hf2J3M035xdv5qftkAeu4lSlG0Sp5NHFBI/FcokvFx aoFdplx98py391x61UHsKe5j6mApB4/WiJiu2ItaGQi7w+uvSuoJXZhJRanynNW5ZM z/tx1wBbip3YdQQuBnAC+SJ7XVKFfrMYSiL09ZQI=
From: Mike Bishop <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2864/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Explicitly allow discard of packets <40 bytes (#2864)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d2f2507c372b_eda3f7f770cd95c3638cb"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: MikeBishop
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: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 13:39:22 -0000

MikeBishop approved this pull request.

> @@ -2510,7 +2510,8 @@ Reset in response, which could lead to an infinite exchange.
 An endpoint MUST ensure that every Stateless Reset that it sends is smaller than
 the packet which triggered it, unless it maintains state sufficient to prevent
 looping.  In the event of a loop, this results in packets eventually being too
-small to trigger a response.
+small to trigger a response.  An endpoint MAY choose not to send a Stateless
+Reset in response to a packet that is smaller than 40 bytes.

This provides the end condition to the loop.

> @@ -2525,9 +2526,6 @@ a small packet might result in Stateless Reset not being useful in detecting
 cases of broken connections where only very small packets are sent; such
 failures might only be detected by other means, such as timers.
-An endpoint can increase the odds that a packet will trigger a Stateless Reset

It might be nice to explicitly mention the packet after quiescence as part of this advice, and/or advise sending at least one 40+ byte packet in each flight.

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