Re: Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-quic-invariants-12: (with COMMENT)

Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com> Wed, 06 January 2021 04:09 UTC

Return-Path: <lucaspardue.24.7@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 725243A0C58; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 20:09:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.846
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.846 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_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 68FWfcPlJgAV; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 20:09:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ej1-x632.google.com (mail-ej1-x632.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::632]) (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 822F63A0C4E; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 20:09:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ej1-x632.google.com with SMTP id b9so3474727ejy.0; Tue, 05 Jan 2021 20:09:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=0EQ6K5vvEYbBc7uUpkIMjs4pyPJ1uscGQzo6GCDEO7U=; b=G+JLmU+qZlwt6xzLbYP+KeLJLZ5UEsvav5lq2FYJ4/eZJIumF4Ot8GsjWoNM5e23vi X1KjWwA0ykbxdb44OMy4pnqbeqNObvxfOujsSuTSZQRO6Gm/z0K9fpV63DX4BSO60RjE 8eAgpvBnHSbKdoGQV+/PocUHgTFq0yZD1l8P66SwXvJwagb7xqBgI4/h6MIVIu4RRsKf yjk9q56FYoPtZGLRj604mJr+ROMyvBhLJYmzJx7Qavny0HF+OVUxQ+oGW13zLeW46iB4 ywh5t+hZ44yLgL5rq8zFFTzVn7ekVgHeVRuwSifRuoSBL3NIgKQ5Mlfmid+ePpIP5hEm MuSg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0EQ6K5vvEYbBc7uUpkIMjs4pyPJ1uscGQzo6GCDEO7U=; b=TTd1fDlz8+TlK5u4FMBPjM95n14lkRMYzp2sEH3SgDVZUGQgkRjQ2440NUngvkk5BD TfXeOLdC2NVQb0WK1909MGcbm88uRhH0q0E4Osip/YmKtVNacryQxHKH4uNQz3WolZE4 InGantiRK/0x8M3WBBRfhRW4C+Uk1mW7LQWhCgrDSfKk7HZCV5sMS7gbb43ppiSoMvPE xmtgM5xPXrY8lwWMAYDk93M0jXZm660AwzeHOu9ETyaDiBmmcH5Jyzf6DckKqCYpRDvX 6B2wicTS4sD0qAAPAeEklgfMwn3Sn7dvSIusi/EdkmbSCWGLQNP19LHcYw5CItViiQms 5sgw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531RWwiSKSGhBtNDzdRBhFo7kImu33kauwsSceyDT9dFJcbqmtRm 9VLVTle2e+7srrCAeaAuJHC30fpAY3Hlb8qH0NA=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxwEQ0OpAqwvbt64AGSgMbp0MAcR1XnUj8UWRed+HH4vdgAwfwLM/bH74DCzALEGg/FapQkcLXKmQi5WXjUnvw=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:cce9:: with SMTP id ot41mr1740932ejb.46.1609906174903; Tue, 05 Jan 2021 20:09:34 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <160985701241.15364.12212123898568789044@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <160985701241.15364.12212123898568789044@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2021 04:09:23 +0000
Message-ID: <CALGR9oaErQnS8Ag23Obn2RNqgheO9vG0uT7kdAtQqRpJMv+7EQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-quic-invariants-12: (with COMMENT)
To: Éric Vyncke <evyncke@cisco.com>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-quic-invariants@ietf.org, WG Chairs <quic-chairs@ietf.org>, QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ad494c05b8337df0"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/PQTYZ956a0WWh20FiR55QuMYQ7M>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 06 Jan 2021 04:09:39 -0000

Hi Éric,

Thanks for the review. I've captured your comments as issues on the QUIC WG
GItHub repository. Links to each are provided as in-line responses.

(I got your name correct on these one :-) )



On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 2:30 PM Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
wrote:

> Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-quic-invariants-12: No Objection
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-quic-invariants/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Thank you for the work put into this document. I find the idea of having an
> 'invariant' document interesting.
>
> Please find below some non-blocking COMMENT points (but replies would be
> appreciated).
>
> I hope that this helps to improve the document,
>
> Regards,
>
> -éric
>
> == COMMENTS ==
>
> Should the use of UDP transport be also an invariant ?
>

https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4546


> -- Abstract --
> I have hard time to reconciliate "...that are expected to remain
> unchanged..."
> with the intended status of standards track... and later with the sentence
> "A
> protocol that does not conform to the properties described in this
> document is
> not QUIC" in section 5.4.
>

https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4547


> -- Section 1 --
> Are we really sure that QUIC will always between TWO endpoints ? I.e., no
> multicast at all ?
>

https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4548


> -- Section 3 --
> I second Barry's point, the presence of "This document uses terms and
> notational conventions from [QUIC-TRANSPORT]." renders QUIC-TRANSPORT as a
> normative reference
>

https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4550


> -- Section 4 --
> Isn't this section somehow redundant as the last paragraph of section 3
> states
> "This document uses ... notational conventions from [QUIC-TRANSPORT]".
>
>
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4551

Cheers
Lucas
On behalf of QUIC WG Chairs