Re: Structuring the BKK spin bit discussion

[Ian Swett <[e-mail]>]

Thanks Brian, please do not pin it to 0.  I have a strong feeling that
could end badly, particularly if early clients and/or servers do not spin.

On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 4:51 AM Brian Trammell (IETF) <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Greetings, all,
>
> I've merged Christian's PR #1931 which covers discretionary spin, and my
> PR #1937 which covers negotiated spin, into draft-ietf-quic-spin-exp. For
> those of you who'd like text in a draft to accompany this discussion, have
> a look at the editor's copy:
>
> https://quicwg.org/base-drafts/draft-ietf-quic-spin-exp.html
>
> Note that the document has two different suggestions as to what endpoints
> should do with the spin bit when not spinning it: either pin it to 0, or
> select a random value per CID. Picking one is a detail question. IMO,
> either is fine; the latter has a (probably negligible) greasing effect.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Brian
>
>
>
> > On 30 Oct 2018, at 18:55, Jana Iyengar <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > Brian, (and Martin),
> >
> > I like this structuring of the discussion, and I think it'll be good to
> use this structure for the discussion in BKK.
> >
> > - jana
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 6:37 AM Brian Trammell (IETF) <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> > hi Marcus, all,
> >
> > So let me step back a bit and suggest a starting point (borrowing
> heavily from MT in an offlist discussion) for discussing what we want to do
> in BKK. (Or rather, I should say, let me suggest a starting point for y'all
> to discuss, because I doubt I'll be in a position to join remotely at 03:00
> next Wednesday local time. Have fun! :)
>
>
>
>