From nobody Fri Dec 4 06:06:30 2020 Return-Path: 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 F11B13A0B87 for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 06:06:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, HTML_MESSAGE=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 (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org 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 TKLrh9xUANPh for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 06:06:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:211:32ff:fe22:186f]) (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 862EE3A0D27 for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 06:06:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:bcd1:2c4b:ddeb:45fd] (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:bcd1:2c4b:ddeb:45fd]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8F1CE61077E for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 16:06:06 +0200 (EET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1607090766; bh=I5fYwDjVAL0+RClMs3Rd76lRFCdLy8T3JVqs4La7A2c=; h=From:Subject:References:To:Date; b=Ha9jKItBh83YqIyUo9HVRXrM+oO7jP8f1RuUesRMw2VdYXTm22OwkE9MG6ddSPa1M Hj72Cs3CLHDtlSLkeKIEZ32gUpoK8ThVUXpcz1Z0raZ63XgVX37PGm/aWzBM3akEnO HywSJR/h+zYf9KMQgxOaU3PbLxuSpiComqV9xu8s= From: Lars Eggert Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_DE3C694E-5D84-4C5F-A545-5A5445DABDDA"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Subject: Fwd: [IANA #1180847] Last Call: (Hypertext Transfer Protocol Version 3 (HTTP/3)) to Proposed Standard Message-Id: References: To: QUIC WG Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 16:06:03 +0200 X-MailScanner-ID: 8F1CE61077E.A5DEB X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org Archived-At: X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org 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, 04 Dec 2020 14:06:29 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_DE3C694E-5D84-4C5F-A545-5A5445DABDDA Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_4646D1BB-3121-4E68-89F2-758AD37B83B3" --Apple-Mail=_4646D1BB-3121-4E68-89F2-758AD37B83B3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Forwarding Mike's response to the list, to there is an archive to link = to. Lars > Begin forwarded message: >=20 > From: Mike Bishop > Subject: RE: [IANA #1180847] Last Call: = (Hypertext Transfer Protocol Version 3 (HTTP/3)) to Proposed Standard > Date: December 3, 2020 at 22:22:54 GMT+2 > To: "drafts-lastcall@iana.org" > Cc: "iesg@ietf.org" , "lars@eggert.org" = , "lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com" = , "magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com" = , "martin.h.duke@gmail.com" = , "quic-chairs@ietf.org" = , "martin.thomson@gmail.com" = , Jana Iyengar >=20 > I don't believe I've seen anything else on this thread. There is a = separate > issue filed during Last Call, > https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4387, suggesting that we = reduce > the number of greasing codepoints reserved. However, I think the same > questions (and same answer) apply regardless of what happens there -- = we don't > want the reserved ranges to be present in the registry, but we do want = IANA > never to give those out. We have an open issue that either needs to = be closed > because this is agreeable or resolved by changing the documents. >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Bishop > Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 4:00 AM > To: drafts-lastcall@iana.org > Cc: iesg@ietf.org; lars@eggert.org; lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com; > magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com; martin.h.duke@gmail.com; = quic-chairs@ietf.org; > martin.thomson@gmail.com; Jana Iyengar > Subject: RE: [IANA #1180847] Last Call: > (Hypertext Transfer Protocol Version 3 (HTTP/3)) to Proposed Standard >=20 > Thanks for the review! >=20 > With regard to the GREASE values (the questions below), we = specifically did > not want the values shown as Reserved for two different reasons. = First, as a > practical matter, 148 quadrillion reserved entries would be difficult = to list > on the page and will drown any actual reservations. Second, the point = of > these values is that an implementer should be following the guidance = to ignore > unknown values; having an explicit list encourages an explicitly = defined > reaction. >=20 > The intent, which we wanted to confirm was possible, was simply to say = that > IANA should not accept registrations for these values. That feels > functionally equivalent to Reserved; if it's possible to be "reserved = but not > listed," that's a reasonable implementation. If it's necessary to = have the > note present, I prefer the "will not be assigned by IANA" language = you've used > for the Error Code registry over noting them as Reserved. >=20 > These questions will apply to QUIC Transport as well, which contains = similar > language for its registries, so I've copied the editors for that = document as > well. >=20 > To the other items: > - I believe the HTTP/3 registries should be a group separate from the = QUIC > registries; having them fall immediately after the group of HTTP/2 = registries > seems like a sensible outcome. > - I will send an e-mail to tls-reg-review@ietf.org to initiate the = review of > the H3 ALPN token. >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Sabrina Tanamal via RT > Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 2:39 PM > Cc: iesg@ietf.org; Mike Bishop ; = lars@eggert.org; > lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com; magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com; > martin.h.duke@gmail.com; quic-chairs@ietf.org > Subject: [IANA #1180847] Last Call: = (Hypertext > Transfer Protocol Version 3 (HTTP/3)) to Proposed Standard >=20 > (BEGIN IANA COMMENTS) >=20 > IESG/Authors/WG Chairs: >=20 > The IANA Functions Operator has completed its review of > draft-ietf-quic-http-32. If any part of this review is inaccurate, = please let > us know. >=20 > IANA understands that some of the actions requested in the IANA = Considerations > section of this document are dependent upon the approval of and = completion of > IANA Actions in another document: draft-ietf-quic-transport. >=20 > The IANA Functions Operator has questions about the actions requested = in the > IANA Considerations section of this document. >=20 > IANA Question --> [ RFC-to-be Section 11.2 of the current draft = request > creation of three new registries: frame types, settings and error = codes. > Should those registries be placed on the registry page created by > draft-ietf-quic-transport or should a new registry page for HTTP/3 be = created > separate from the registry for QUIC? >=20 > The IANA Functions Operator understands that, upon approval of this = document, > there are five actions which we must complete. >=20 > First, in the TLS Application-Layer Protocol Negotiation (ALPN) = Protocol IDs > on the Transport Layer Security (TLS) Extensions registry page located = at: >=20 > https://www.iana.org/assignments/tls-extensiontype-values/ >=20 > a single, new registration will be made as follows: >=20 > Protocol: HTTP/3 > Identification Sequence: 0x68 0x33 ("h3") > Specification: [ RFC-to-be ] >=20 > As this document requests registrations in a Specification Required = (see RFC > 8126) registry, we will initiate the required Expert Review via a = separate > request. This review must be completed before the document's IANA = state can be > changed to "IANA OK." >=20 > Second, a new registry is to be created called the HTTP/3 Frame Type = registry. > The registry will be created on a registry page to be decided as a = result of > the answer to the question from IANA above. >=20 > IANA will add a note to the registry indicating that: " each code of = the > format "0x1f * N + 0x21" for non-negative integer values of N (that = is, 0x21, > 0x40, ..., through 0x3FFFFFFFFFFFFFFE) are reserved." >=20 > IANA Question --> are those values to be marked as reserved in the new > registry? >=20 > The registration policy for the new registry is as follows: >=20 > 0x00 - 0x3f - Standards Action or IESG Approval > 0x40 - 3FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF - Specification Required >=20 > There are initial registrations in the new registry as follows: >=20 > +=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D+ > | Frame Type | Value | Specification | > +=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D+ > | DATA | 0x0 | [ RFC-to-be Section 7.2.1 ] | > +--------------+-------+-----------------------------+ > | HEADERS | 0x1 | [ RFC-to-be Section 7.2.2 ] | > +--------------+-------+-----------------------------+ > | Reserved | 0x2 | N/A | > +--------------+-------+-----------------------------+ > | CANCEL_PUSH | 0x3 | [ RFC-to-be Section 7.2.3] | > +--------------+-------+-----------------------------+ > | SETTINGS | 0x4 | [ RFC-to-be Section 7.2.4 ] | > +--------------+-------+-----------------------------+ > | PUSH_PROMISE | 0x5 | [ RFC-to-be Section 7.2.5 ] | > +--------------+-------+-----------------------------+ > | Reserved | 0x6 | N/A | > +--------------+-------+-----------------------------+ > | GOAWAY | 0x7 | [ RFC-to-be Section 7.2.6 ] | > +--------------+-------+-----------------------------+ > | Reserved | 0x8 | N/A | > +--------------+-------+-----------------------------+ > | Reserved | 0x9 | N/A | > +--------------+-------+-----------------------------+ > | MAX_PUSH_ID | 0xd | [ RFC-to-be Section 7.2.7 ] | > +--------------+-------+-----------------------------+ >=20 > Third, a new registry is to be created called the HTTP/3 Settings = registry. > The registry will be created on a registry page to be decided as a = result of > the answer to the question from IANA above. >=20 > IANA will add a note to the registry indicating that: " each code of = the > format "0x1f * N + 0x21" for non-negative integer values of N (that = is, 0x21, > 0x40, ..., through 0x3FFFFFFFFFFFFFF) are reserved." >=20 > IANA Question --> are those values to be marked as reserved in the new > registry? >=20 > The registration policy for the new registry is as follows: >=20 > 0x00 - 0x3f - Standards Action or IESG Approval > 0x40 - 3FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF - Specification Required >=20 > There are initial registrations in the new registry as follows: >=20 > = +=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+= > | Setting Name | Value | Specification | Default | > = +=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+= > | Reserved | 0x2 | N/A | N/A | > = +------------------------+-------+-------------------------------+--------= ---+ > | Reserved | 0x3 | N/A | N/A | > = +------------------------+-------+-------------------------------+--------= ---+ > | Reserved | 0x4 | N/A | N/A | > = +------------------------+-------+-------------------------------+--------= ---+ > | Reserved | 0x5 | N/A | N/A | > = +------------------------+-------+-------------------------------+--------= ---+ > | MAX_FIELD_SECTION_SIZE | 0x6 | [ RFC-to-be Section 7.2.4.1 ] | = Unlimited | > = +------------------------+-------+-------------------------------+--------= ---+ >=20 > Fourth, a new registry is to be created called the HTTP/3 Error Code = registry. > The registry will be created on a registry page to be decided as a = result of > the answer to the question from IANA above. >=20 > IANA will add a note to the registry indicating that: " each code of = the > format "0x1f * N + 0x21" for non-negative integer values of N (that = is, 0x21, > 0x40, ..., through 0x3FFFFFFFFFFFFFF) are reserved." >=20 > IANA Question --> are those values to be marked as reserved in the new > registry? >=20 > The registration policy for the new registry is as follows: >=20 > 0x00 - 0x3f - Standards Action or IESG Approval > 0x40 - 3FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF - Specification Required >=20 > There are initial registrations in the new registry as follows: >=20 > = +=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= +=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D+ > | Name | Value | Description | Specification | > = +=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= +=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D+ > | H3_NO_ERROR | 0x0100 | No error | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] | > = +---------------------------+--------+--------------+---------------------= --------+ > | H3_GENERAL_PROTOCOL_ERROR | 0x0101 | General | [ RFC-to-be Section = 8.1 ] | > | | | protocol | | > | | | error | | > = +---------------------------+--------+--------------+---------------------= --------+ > | H3_INTERNAL_ERROR | 0x0102 | Internal | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] | > | | | error | | > = +---------------------------+--------+--------------+---------------------= --------+ > | H3_STREAM_CREATION_ERROR | 0x0103 | Stream | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 = ] | > | | | creation | | > | | | error | | > = +---------------------------+--------+--------------+---------------------= --------+ > | H3_CLOSED_CRITICAL_STREAM | 0x0104 | Critical | [ RFC-to-be Section = 8.1 ] | > | | | stream was | | > | | | closed | | > = +---------------------------+--------+--------------+---------------------= --------+ > | H3_FRAME_UNEXPECTED | 0x0105 | Frame not | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] = | > | | | permitted | | > | | | in the | | > | | | current | | > | | | state | | > = +---------------------------+--------+--------------+---------------------= --------+ > | H3_FRAME_ERROR | 0x0106 | Frame | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] | > | | | violated | | > | | | layout or | | > | | | size rules | | > = +---------------------------+--------+--------------+---------------------= --------+ > | H3_EXCESSIVE_LOAD | 0x0107 | Peer | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] | > | | | generating | | > | | | excessive | | > | | | load | | > = +---------------------------+--------+--------------+---------------------= --------+ > | H3_ID_ERROR | 0x0108 | An | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] | > | | | identifier | | > | | | was used | | > | | | incorrectly | | > = +---------------------------+--------+--------------+---------------------= --------+ > | H3_SETTINGS_ERROR | 0x0109 | SETTINGS | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] | > | | | frame | | > | | | contained | | > | | | invalid | | > | | | values | | > = +---------------------------+--------+--------------+---------------------= --------+ > | H3_MISSING_SETTINGS | 0x010a | No SETTINGS | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 = ] | > | | | frame | | > | | | received | | > = +---------------------------+--------+--------------+---------------------= --------+ > | H3_REQUEST_REJECTED | 0x010b | Request not | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 = ] | > | | | processed | | > = +---------------------------+--------+--------------+---------------------= --------+ > | H3_REQUEST_CANCELLED | 0x010c | Data no | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] = | > | | | longer | | > | | | needed | | > = +---------------------------+--------+--------------+---------------------= --------+ > | H3_REQUEST_INCOMPLETE | 0x010d | Stream | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] = | > | | | terminated | | > | | | early | | > = +---------------------------+--------+--------------+---------------------= --------+ > | H3_CONNECT_ERROR | 0x010f | TCP reset | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] | > | | | or error on | | > | | | CONNECT | | > | | | request | | > = +---------------------------+--------+--------------+---------------------= --------+ > | H3_VERSION_FALLBACK | 0x0110 | Retry over | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 = ] | > | | | HTTP/1.1 | | > = +---------------------------+--------+--------------+---------------------= --------+ >=20 > Fifth, a new registry is to be created called the HTTP/3 Stream Types > registry. The registry will be created on a registry page to be = decided as a > result of the answer to the question from IANA above. >=20 > The registration policy for the new registry is as follows: >=20 > 0x00 - 0x3f - Standards Action or IESG Approval > 0x40 - 3FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF - Specification Required >=20 > IANA will put a note in the new registry that indicates that each code = of the > format "0x1f * N + 0x21" for non-negative integer values of N (that = is, 0x21, > 0x40, ..., through > 0x3ffffffffffffffe) will not be assigned by IANA. >=20 > There are initial registrations in the new registry as follows: >=20 > +=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+ > | Stream Type | Value | Specification | Sender | > +=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+ > | Control Stream | 0x00 | [ RFC-to-be Section 6.2.1 ] | Both | > +----------------+-------+-----------------------------+--------+ > | Push Stream | 0x01 | [ RFC-to-be Section 4.4 ] | Server | > +----------------+-------+-----------------------------+--------+ >=20 > The IANA Functions Operator understands that these are the only = actions > required to be completed upon approval of this document. >=20 > Note: The actions requested in this document will not be completed = until the > document has been approved for publication as an RFC. This message is = meant > only to confirm the list of actions that will be performed. >=20 > Thank you, >=20 > Sabrina Tanamal > Senior IANA Services Specialist >=20 > (END IANA COMMENTS) >=20 --Apple-Mail=_4646D1BB-3121-4E68-89F2-758AD37B83B3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Forwarding Mike's response to the list, to there is an = archive to link to.

Lars

Begin forwarded = message:

From: = Mike Bishop <mbishop@evequefou.be>
Subject: = RE: [IANA = #1180847] Last Call: <draft-ietf-quic-http-32.txt> (Hypertext = Transfer Protocol Version 3 (HTTP/3)) to Proposed Standard
Date: = December 3, 2020 at 22:22:54 = GMT+2
To: = "drafts-lastcall@iana.org" <drafts-lastcall@iana.org>
Cc: = "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, "lars@eggert.org" <lars@eggert.org>, "lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com" <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>, "magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com" <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>, "martin.h.duke@gmail.com" <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>, "quic-chairs@ietf.org" = <quic-chairs@ietf.org>, "martin.thomson@gmail.com" <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Jana Iyengar <jri.ietf@gmail.com>

I don't believe I've seen = anything else on this thread.  There is a separate
issue filed during Last Call,
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4387, = suggesting that we reduce
the number of greasing = codepoints reserved.  However, I think the same
questions (and same answer) apply regardless of what happens = there -- we don't
want the reserved ranges to be present = in the registry, but we do want IANA
never to give those = out.  We have an open issue that either needs to be closed
because this is agreeable or resolved by changing the = documents.

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Bishop
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, = 2020 4:00 AM
To: drafts-lastcall@iana.org
Cc: iesg@ietf.org; lars@eggert.org; lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com;
magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com; martin.h.duke@gmail.com; quic-chairs@ietf.org; =
martin.thomson@gmail.com; Jana Iyengar <jri.ietf@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [IANA = #1180847] Last Call: <draft-ietf-quic-http-32.txt>
(Hypertext Transfer Protocol Version 3 (HTTP/3)) to Proposed = Standard

Thanks for the review!

With regard to the GREASE values (the = questions below), we specifically did
not want the values = shown as Reserved for two different reasons.  First, as a
practical matter, 148 quadrillion reserved entries would be = difficult to list
on the page and will drown any actual = reservations.  Second, the point of
these values is = that an implementer should be following the guidance to ignore
unknown values; having an explicit list encourages an = explicitly defined
reaction.

The intent, which we wanted to confirm was possible, was = simply to say that
IANA should not accept registrations = for these values.  That feels
functionally equivalent = to Reserved; if it's possible to be "reserved but not
listed," that's a reasonable implementation.  If it's = necessary to have the
note present, I prefer the "will not = be assigned by IANA" language you've used
for the Error = Code registry over noting them as Reserved.

These questions will apply to QUIC Transport as well, which = contains similar
language for its registries, so I've = copied the editors for that document as
well.

To the other items:
- I believe = the HTTP/3 registries should be a group separate from the QUIC
registries; having them fall immediately after the group of = HTTP/2 registries
seems like a sensible outcome.
- I will send an e-mail to tls-reg-review@ietf.org to initiate the review of
the H3 ALPN token.

-----Original = Message-----
From: Sabrina Tanamal via RT <drafts-lastcall@iana.org>
Sent: Monday, = November 16, 2020 2:39 PM
Cc: iesg@ietf.org; Mike Bishop = <mbishop@evequefou.be>; lars@eggert.org;
lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com; magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com;
martin.h.duke@gmail.com; quic-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: [IANA = #1180847] Last Call: <draft-ietf-quic-http-32.txt> (Hypertext
Transfer Protocol Version 3 (HTTP/3)) to Proposed Standard

(BEGIN IANA COMMENTS)

IESG/Authors/WG Chairs:

The IANA = Functions Operator has completed its review of
draft-ietf-quic-http-32. If any part of this review is = inaccurate, please let
us know.

IANA understands that some of the actions requested in the = IANA Considerations
section of this document are dependent = upon the approval of and completion of
IANA Actions in = another document: draft-ietf-quic-transport.

The IANA Functions Operator has questions about the actions = requested in the
IANA Considerations section of this = document.

IANA Question --> [ RFC-to-be = Section 11.2 of the current draft request
creation of = three new registries: frame types, settings and error codes.
Should those registries be placed on the registry page = created by
draft-ietf-quic-transport or should a new = registry page for HTTP/3 be created
separate from the = registry for QUIC?

The IANA Functions = Operator understands that, upon approval of this document,
there are five actions which we must complete.

First, in the TLS Application-Layer Protocol = Negotiation (ALPN) Protocol IDs
on the Transport Layer = Security (TLS) Extensions registry page located at:

https://www.iana.org/assignments/tls-extensiontype-values/<= br class=3D"">
a single, new registration will be made as = follows:

Protocol: HTTP/3
Identification Sequence: 0x68 0x33 ("h3")
Specification: [ RFC-to-be ]

As = this document requests registrations in a Specification Required (see = RFC
8126) registry, we will initiate the required Expert = Review via a separate
request. This review must be = completed before the document's IANA state can be
changed = to "IANA OK."

Second, a new registry is to = be created called the HTTP/3 Frame Type registry.
The = registry will be created on a registry page to be decided as a result = of
the answer to the question from IANA above.

IANA will add a note to the registry = indicating that: " each code of the
format "0x1f * N + = 0x21" for non-negative integer values of N (that is, 0x21,
0x40, ..., through 0x3FFFFFFFFFFFFFFE) are reserved."

IANA Question --> are those values to be = marked as reserved in the new
registry?

The registration policy for the new registry is as = follows:

0x00 - 0x3f - Standards Action or = IESG Approval
0x40 - 3FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF - Specification = Required

There are initial registrations in = the new registry as follows:

+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= +=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D+
| Frame Type | Value | Specification |
+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= +=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D+
| DATA | 0x0 | [ RFC-to-be Section 7.2.1 ] = |
+--------------+-------+-----------------------------+
| HEADERS | 0x1 | [ RFC-to-be Section 7.2.2 ] |
+--------------+-------+-----------------------------+
| Reserved | 0x2 | N/A |
+--------------+-------+-----------------------------+
| CANCEL_PUSH | 0x3 | [ RFC-to-be Section 7.2.3] |
+--------------+-------+-----------------------------+
| SETTINGS | 0x4 | [ RFC-to-be Section 7.2.4 ] |
+--------------+-------+-----------------------------+
| PUSH_PROMISE | 0x5 | [ RFC-to-be Section 7.2.5 ] |
+--------------+-------+-----------------------------+
| Reserved | 0x6 | N/A |
+--------------+-------+-----------------------------+
| GOAWAY | 0x7 | [ RFC-to-be Section 7.2.6 ] |
+--------------+-------+-----------------------------+
| Reserved | 0x8 | N/A |
+--------------+-------+-----------------------------+
| Reserved | 0x9 | N/A |
+--------------+-------+-----------------------------+
| MAX_PUSH_ID | 0xd | [ RFC-to-be Section 7.2.7 ] |
+--------------+-------+-----------------------------+

Third, a new registry is to be created called = the HTTP/3 Settings registry.
The registry will be created = on a registry page to be decided as a result of
the answer = to the question from IANA above.

IANA will = add a note to the registry indicating that: " each code of the
format "0x1f * N + 0x21" for non-negative integer values of N = (that is, 0x21,
0x40, ..., through 0x3FFFFFFFFFFFFFF) are = reserved."

IANA Question --> are those = values to be marked as reserved in the new
registry?

The registration policy for the new registry = is as follows:

0x00 - 0x3f - Standards = Action or IESG Approval
0x40 - 3FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF - = Specification Required

There are initial = registrations in the new registry as follows:

+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D+
| Setting Name | Value | Specification | = Default |
+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D+
| Reserved | 0x2 | N/A | N/A |
+------------------------+-------+-----------------------------= --+-----------+
| Reserved | 0x3 | N/A | N/A |
+------------------------+-------+-----------------------------= --+-----------+
| Reserved | 0x4 | N/A | N/A |
+------------------------+-------+-----------------------------= --+-----------+
| Reserved | 0x5 | N/A | N/A |
+------------------------+-------+-----------------------------= --+-----------+
| MAX_FIELD_SECTION_SIZE | 0x6 | [ = RFC-to-be Section 7.2.4.1 ] | Unlimited |
+------------------------+-------+-----------------------------= --+-----------+

Fourth, a new registry is = to be created called the HTTP/3 Error Code registry.
The = registry will be created on a registry page to be decided as a result = of
the answer to the question from IANA above.

IANA will add a note to the registry = indicating that: " each code of the
format "0x1f * N + = 0x21" for non-negative integer values of N (that is, 0x21,
0x40, ..., through 0x3FFFFFFFFFFFFFF) are reserved."

IANA Question --> are those values to be = marked as reserved in the new
registry?

The registration policy for the new registry is as = follows:

0x00 - 0x3f - Standards Action or = IESG Approval
0x40 - 3FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF - Specification = Required

There are initial registrations in = the new registry as follows:

+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+
| Name | Value | Description | = Specification |
+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+
| H3_NO_ERROR | 0x0100 | No = error | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] |
+---------------------------+--------+--------------+----------= -------------------+
| H3_GENERAL_PROTOCOL_ERROR | 0x0101 = | General | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] |
| | | protocol | = |
| | | error | |
+---------------------------+--------+--------------+----------= -------------------+
| H3_INTERNAL_ERROR | 0x0102 | = Internal | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] |
| | | error | |
+---------------------------+--------+--------------+----------= -------------------+
| H3_STREAM_CREATION_ERROR | 0x0103 | = Stream | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] |
| | | creation | |
| | | error | |
+---------------------------+--------+--------------+----------= -------------------+
| H3_CLOSED_CRITICAL_STREAM | 0x0104 = | Critical | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] |
| | | stream was = | |
| | | closed | |
+---------------------------+--------+--------------+----------= -------------------+
| H3_FRAME_UNEXPECTED | 0x0105 | = Frame not | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] |
| | | permitted | = |
| | | in the | |
| | | current | |
| | | state | |
+---------------------------+--------+--------------+----------= -------------------+
| H3_FRAME_ERROR | 0x0106 | Frame | [ = RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] |
| | | violated | |
|= | | layout or | |
| | | size rules | |
+---------------------------+--------+--------------+----------= -------------------+
| H3_EXCESSIVE_LOAD | 0x0107 | Peer | = [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] |
| | | generating | |
| | | excessive | |
| | | load | |
+---------------------------+--------+--------------+----------= -------------------+
| H3_ID_ERROR | 0x0108 | An | [ = RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] |
| | | identifier | |
| | | was used | |
| | | incorrectly | |
+---------------------------+--------+--------------+----------= -------------------+
| H3_SETTINGS_ERROR | 0x0109 | = SETTINGS | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] |
| | | frame | |
| | | contained | |
| | | invalid | |
| | | values | |
+---------------------------+--------+--------------+----------= -------------------+
| H3_MISSING_SETTINGS | 0x010a | No = SETTINGS | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] |
| | | frame | |
| | | received | |
+---------------------------+--------+--------------+----------= -------------------+
| H3_REQUEST_REJECTED | 0x010b | = Request not | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] |
| | | processed = | |
+---------------------------+--------+--------------+----------= -------------------+
| H3_REQUEST_CANCELLED | 0x010c | = Data no | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] |
| | | longer | |
| | | needed | |
+---------------------------+--------+--------------+----------= -------------------+
| H3_REQUEST_INCOMPLETE | 0x010d | = Stream | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] |
| | | terminated | = |
| | | early | |
+---------------------------+--------+--------------+----------= -------------------+
| H3_CONNECT_ERROR | 0x010f | TCP = reset | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] |
| | | or error on | = |
| | | CONNECT | |
| | | request | |
+---------------------------+--------+--------------+----------= -------------------+
| H3_VERSION_FALLBACK | 0x0110 | = Retry over | [ RFC-to-be Section 8.1 ] |
| | | HTTP/1.1 | = |
+---------------------------+--------+--------------+----------= -------------------+

Fifth, a new registry = is to be created called the HTTP/3 Stream Types
registry. = The registry will be created on a registry page to be decided as a
result of the answer to the question from IANA above.

The registration policy for the new registry = is as follows:

0x00 - 0x3f - Standards = Action or IESG Approval
0x40 - 3FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF - = Specification Required

IANA will put a note = in the new registry that indicates that each code of the
format "0x1f * N + 0x21" for non-negative integer values of N = (that is, 0x21,
0x40, ..., through
0x3ffffffffffffffe) will not be assigned by IANA.

There are initial registrations in the new = registry as follows:

+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+
| Stream Type = | Value | Specification | Sender |
+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+
| Control = Stream | 0x00 | [ RFC-to-be Section 6.2.1 ] | Both |
+----------------+-------+-----------------------------+-------= -+
| Push Stream | 0x01 | [ RFC-to-be Section 4.4 ] | = Server |
+----------------+-------+-----------------------------+-------= -+

The IANA Functions Operator understands = that these are the only actions
required to be completed = upon approval of this document.

Note: =  The actions requested in this document will not be completed until = the
document has been approved for publication as an RFC. = This message is meant
only to confirm the list of actions = that will be performed.

Thank you,

Sabrina Tanamal
Senior IANA = Services Specialist

(END IANA COMMENTS)


= --Apple-Mail=_4646D1BB-3121-4E68-89F2-758AD37B83B3-- --Apple-Mail=_DE3C694E-5D84-4C5F-A545-5A5445DABDDA Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEmpq0ZpSoejRmyhheVLXDCb9wwVcFAl/KQksACgkQVLXDCb9w wVcFbBAApzabQT8MYE0rluT64tq4Er0U76453CFEpny0KOmt2NOT99FKejc1Nc4j qTN+BMEVg5pU5pBnj8auMMfpEE3zzH0olaaz0iglmvFuLu67OEVop/UFfgYBdfcn 96A360UZp2b/FVmH6qKO2hXZ3StX/E32tUG8FyEsXUfnLdHcl59AGVT4SA1BpnpV yM2j3EpnrrbDbmujsnsLtB3IuR3zu0qZC3ZIZgNPyPniHqLYTxHF9UH+VrP0XW5a MvGLB3+NsB9fgUHuT/rR9cxaD+uA5OR/Dy45PlG7WhDgONvhq33ikviyrp7QaueQ GOgxhbzDtnnJoXrVg/erd/KTicrD+yHpRtZOQwPe5XeAyuIX09Uy73wN7cx/BxdH 4FJxValfqR4AaRAHxnL7Drt+sNPDx0N9qaB18+vrcfEzWrmkujYQ1o0iEFCoOp6J VHUzAL65TpqMLa+MKWKZmuZ0wnpfTBdzOo2NPLeywOtGEBjhiT7+7Ch7l2g1TZIr r86L1WFHcK6ehBdlXkMbnF9j4zlOLZUHjOKr15d0Uc16mafYnGIAcFKJ3nNT9Yjh tGpcxWKbaso+DUs7buwcRFtayGn3FWPB9C+YruEB2vcTHZ9QHT2aRWiCm2ApUYLb X/Bcisu0RdnIMUv9OQ5+/BLYrYh0c5kFmyPozG9X8LkTtNIv0ag= =VJHn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_DE3C694E-5D84-4C5F-A545-5A5445DABDDA--