IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Extension frames (#1068)

ekr <notifications@github.com> Thu, 05 April 2018 03:12 UTC

Return-Path: <bounces+848413-a050-quic-issues=ietf.org@sgmail.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 0FC251243FE for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 20:12:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.009
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.009 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 aHcpg63I-C0v for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 20:12:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from o6.sgmail.github.com (o6.sgmail.github.com [192.254.113.101]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C729120725 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 20:12:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; h=from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=uiwyDdVRsIga+WFA3KQk/v6vvDU=; b=gKGffjdrQI0UyahD rwFDD7PBhwzHHMbicG9QYXMrC28Iwya2KFt1AE08lVK6vC0QYnNwHteQjzh2ulGr G3lAdLy0v4ozfNKC+2BrL2nnnV+njXzSGIf/hiiLyPGnTgDdTQkD4FVR7qb4SlGo hgLyzzl2q0+bD8vMuHm0DzGJ/vQ=
Received: by filter0241p1las1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter0241p1las1-10923-5AC5940F-E 2018-04-05 03:12:15.949850709 +0000 UTC
Received: from smtp.github.com (out-1.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.192]) by ismtpd0001p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id sJwaFgM7TzuJfRMQlceyNw for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 05 Apr 2018 03:12:15.786 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 03:12:16 +0000
From: ekr <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab68386bf42446c5af1a74eab916ba293b7263e74c92cf0000000116dd560f92a169ce115ea54e@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1068/c378808162@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1068@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1068@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Extension frames (#1068)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5ac5940fadfff_1db583fbda9c68f301323df"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ekr
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak3JapFLJpEe3Oqsyyd7mlgfIIL0D2Df17v2NE GzAJRimTfFV4VYtdY+j0hHTxver0glU2qyg2LLUnzgnkwRVx+SAwQc3pwIEZ2OoqaOOIr3UTGAxGLv XByqpmt7gJe0RvJStIHfjQ9dMyMTjQBqlKnF0VnsZm0Mlr9R9sjUYe0xSQ==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/yocQCCshmEkGRJnDRKZSYRj9NOA>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 03:12:39 -0000

On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 7:52 PM, Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com>
wrote:

> Just to clear something up: this establishes what frames mean. It is NOT
> feature negotiation. If, as in @kazuho <https://github.com/kazuho>'s
> example, we want to add a new packet number encryption scheme, we could do
> that with a new transport parameter. It makes no sense to do this.
>
Well, as you acknowledge below, it is feature negotiation for features that
need new frames.

I'm undecided on the varint idea. It seems to critically depend on also
> having a length field on every frame. I suspect that this is what @ekr
> <https://github.com/ekr> wants, but I have heard pretty strong opposition
> to that notion from others.
>
Why does it depend on having a length field for the frame? You would still
be forbidden from sending non-negotiated frame types. The varint is just a
hack to keep the size of the type byte down.


-- 
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/1068#issuecomment-378808162

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status