Re: Working Group Last Call: QUIC grease bit

David Schinazi <> Fri, 22 October 2021 16:34 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EE563A1123 for <>; Fri, 22 Oct 2021 09:34:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BDJdd6DdRWOF for <>; Fri, 22 Oct 2021 09:34:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::632]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D0103A112E for <>; Fri, 22 Oct 2021 09:34:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id v20so3096612plo.7 for <>; Fri, 22 Oct 2021 09:34:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=GEaF0x86ROo1RDIJmr3FnYtNK/JYSvzCERSvzO081K4=; b=e2tXMPJQZt7+PIgLJvDL0PaYBPp5baD8WEeL9pIos1Y4HqTgEDKbzP+fjeZKgSEV/G dmx6TH+yLrkhd4/lXEMtMU7ag47G4nOgCyTPQvz74CsitQydrejYnEnIZP8SDempbTHN E7aaBQhABdqsiat1H1t7ltulpM8gvutWGknNQRqC0vYhgztWhlDv5xEJnt7PKWxMUtq6 p6KKefkDjXTvpI6Bbs83x7eYa0BK+RkSpFKSE63x5j/VJVAE129SstC4f+X/0qHODflN +gsoGbXJF9nAjkYgRnhKovBkdvvfjzf9/kaZuLPXc0st3/9R9rprs/kJhynJENks8B03 IrsQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=GEaF0x86ROo1RDIJmr3FnYtNK/JYSvzCERSvzO081K4=; b=m1uUsory9UHVqC8e9ZQYrvJ8HK/y2LUphCHzT1Ehwp5sArM8bNQn8c/+kxpXOR7guF 8Qm/D3WZlgZONUu+MVIQERx6rVQToNFBGsuqbJk/8BRdlxiWxPcmn/hNjJlfsjfzcbYa ZHcq//wH7bDiTc6p4R+oGz5jzZNJSQWgP0aihnaGOaXaFMMumF3rNhXABz4ZCum5ob8v 9UoFKoED60dsISWPh0GUx2Ws/A01H3uOXIQP/C7IqkYIHYrhbr71C5opTp79bgbkl2BM XTII6wOR9ayOB0NAlo1T2hLF9/TVtStL/NunA8BMgBk0KF1ZUmSlx1EooUaTlChMJx9w 89Rg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533oSiX33b5vJNVzwR2BxnNAo2aPmLRDMp2w/KR1EZ+17x0i/y0U Ye14n0TDGnRZr3r7K+o8rCcDt1GWaOd8fU3wska0qfPu
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJylxeUNxxVfPjWSZz8dqZWgLdxMG2JSGRNH8sj+a0jF+ETF71x87o259mEKTIiO7cXmTCtcGMxERKBb9RXmN+E=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:7804:b0:13e:d4c6:e701 with SMTP id p4-20020a170902780400b0013ed4c6e701mr879905pll.66.1634920464919; Fri, 22 Oct 2021 09:34:24 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: David Schinazi <>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2021 09:34:13 -0700
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: Working Group Last Call: QUIC grease bit
To: Martin Thomson <>
Cc: QUIC <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008c328e05cef39599"
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Main mailing list of the IETF QUIC working group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2021 16:34:31 -0000

Thanks for the discussion everyone.

I've reviewed the draft, and based on how simple it is, I don't think we
need to hold it to the same large deployment standard as we might want for
very complex proposals.

I think the draft is clear, well-written, and ready for publication except
for the missing Acknowledgements section. I support publication with the
assumption that Acknowledgements will be filled in before this is sent to
the IESG.

Also, I'd recommend getting the transport parameter provisionally assigned
in the IANA registry now - our IANA experts are very friendly :-)


On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 11:45 PM Martin Thomson <> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 22, 2021, at 12:21, David Schinazi wrote:
> > It would be great to have someone deploy this server-side as well to
> > ensure it works at scale.
> seems to be running this.  I just got a
> short header packet with the bit cleared.
> That's not necessarily the scale you might like, in the sense that it
> might not attract the high usage you might like in order to understand that
> middleboxes haven't fixated on the bit being set, but that might be an
> unrealistic standard to set.