Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Interleaved Stream IDs are awkward (#1430)

[Kazuho Oku <[e-mail]>]

> I'm wondering whether we could alternatively fix this in text only. If we say that the stream type is indicated by the two low bits of the field, and the Stream ID within the type is indicated by the remaining upper bits of the number, then you get to the same place (indicating streams as 1us, 3bc, etc.) without modifying the bits on the wire. That's basically just codifying a change in presentation / reference terminology.

@MikeBishop I am not sure if I like the approach. Within the implementation, I would like to use an integral type to determine a stream. I'd assume that would be the same for others.

Using the low-bits for determining the type will mean that we will be calling, for example, a stream represented by a number of `4` as `1bc`. To me, it is more confusing than the current scheme.

-- 
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/1430#issuecomment-396793738