IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Unidirectional streams PR

Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 22 June 2017 22:47 UTC

Return-Path: <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29083129B95 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 15:47:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 yyZjul9K3-8N for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 15:47:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x22b.google.com (mail-qt0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22b]) (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 31E5F129B8C for <quic@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 15:47:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id u12so23333012qth.0 for <quic@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 15:47:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=yPN/gUbWVGyQIENuzZ2y8ksrIq7H+O+H97d2bV9tymw=; b=M6PHNisZiJQXW18MF0w3T+4PwS+bQtwK3TLbDsNnf4gCcRiQavhNwvSXcTxPSdrWe3 5O8d/G7TQr41aXatIG5JNZsWYLsOgkREmw/KqIQQ/wMLTxaN3aLFbpayiE4Q0sO7icD+ XvXuvDJpHfmBqrJEd4kCkoUKC5/Xr5ngoimqKSanJqMZVq5XAIEJMWCHvgLR5b4CYreQ VAFXHTtZUteAqE2ufWt64RKOnsoi+tt5FWqrrAL5+DDSg6aS47xn7Db7kiWoNnn8zmaZ I22AWu758dJR7FpEeB3ExkYeXQLJlxSS4bNb5IfgRJhMqnqHNjkDmCcGePOOHc2Z/qpQ nAzg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=yPN/gUbWVGyQIENuzZ2y8ksrIq7H+O+H97d2bV9tymw=; b=pN8a5cjrvGp8UE9dzccqIsJUCcnp8HjmkgHWjlQVPveJmXOJsDvgWz1xdD+z50C2zp Vae2dTCAjP8Hi0YHHFqGTyXlcvjjUAhHxkkeI3RI3sGFzEH6f/sgni7TGVl851IKj2vo maM410CL6ycgNXDktxRfJ6kdbpPi/dTksXLAa5Ss7ewEk7gTWkXbQ0cqvYwnD1iXJDWn jlsUB9+DdYLIukHu6NVUkBYkgO+uTfoLDUh8BbzdOS4qVETUZIU9uZnuCQ1wfhJpAKRM bm0bMq2+6C1dmQk8KhR0Fs55ivuASSDVqhE72/2ihIPU0D0uQJdFGr7633iyHiui7v9R 5Vtw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOxCnNt520Kut1RSwYM8+FT+kkmB2S4qbNWrzHqtdX9PrcYju0y7 zsM8jV4ekCHnkCgSg2uZTyTmDaKXqw==
X-Received: by 10.237.44.7 with SMTP id f7mr6468252qtd.52.1498171638235; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 15:47:18 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.200.34.9 with HTTP; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 15:46:47 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnU6H+2AeY0n7-d+k0baM7UJ6fuN4PX7ez+KRN17eFg6Yg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABkgnnW+veDVq27v+wTz0cA=eGPRTLQ1A90A0ynHLPU88Pg77Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAOdDvNpORYBr7+Q8M_nnGOm4MsWqVbm6koOtQ+=An8t7AbccGg@mail.gmail.com> <CAGD1bZb9Na32z=Gg9JS+FzrGGN9Jhw=QDTMTYS=FVcNesoSMig@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnV2yPP-qgLKZYPsvawXc7FP4RM7CZDDa7aFaNy0KxLfag@mail.gmail.com> <CA+9kkMCF+wUPA452gYgdG65Y4zNctzGWd4HtZ2Ge70=S9k-_Qw@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnU6H+2AeY0n7-d+k0baM7UJ6fuN4PX7ez+KRN17eFg6Yg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 15:46:47 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+9kkMB5drUWMqdOY0OztiAUJAEOSyKuerAomgpUa-6PV01oiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Unidirectional streams PR
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com>, QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c05df904f46bd0552944447"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/-Ot9Bfsdyr5Ai-wdPu92QkRxyZQ>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Main mailing list of the IETF QUIC working group <quic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 22:47:22 -0000

On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 23 June 2017 at 05:15, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> > My personal take on that right answer there is to support both, with an
> > explicit signal of when each model is in use,
>
> I have heard this request now from several folks at Google.


Please be careful withyour attributions.  Several people replied with very
explicit statements that the were putting forward personal opinions.  Some
of those people, including those with different opinions, have day jobs at
the same place, but we were not speaking for our employer nor with the same
experience (either at that employer or elsewhere).

thanks,

Ted





> I don't
> know how to make this work without increasing complexity considerably
> .  I'd be willing to be wrong about this, but would prefer to see a
> proposal.  I don't need a fully-worked proposal with text, just a
> sketch of how the pieces work in enough detail to understand how this
> might interact with other parts of the protocol.  I think that Jana
> offered to do this, so maybe I can wait for that (c.f., Mark's earlier
> statement about priority/urgency).
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email