Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-quic-invariants-12: (with DISCUSS)

[Robert Wilton via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-quic-invariants-12: Discuss

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/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi,

A trivial discuss that should hopefully be easy to resolve, and it is plausible
that the resolution may end up being in the QUIC transport document:

In this document, the unused bits are defined as:

                   Figure 4: Version Negotiation Packet

   Only the most significant bit of the first byte of a Version
   Negotiation packet has any defined value.  The remaining 7 bits,
   labeled Unused, can be set to any value when sending and MUST be
   ignored on receipt.

In the QUIC transport document, they are defined as this:

                   Figure 14: Version Negotiation Packet

   The value in the Unused field is selected randomly by the server.
   Clients MUST ignore the value of this field.  Servers SHOULD set the
   most significant bit of this field (0x40) to 1 so that Version
   Negotiation packets appear to have the Fixed Bit field.

I would have expected that these two should be consistent as to whether the
Fixed Bit SHOULD be set to 1 or not.  Given draft-thomson-quic-bit-grease-00,
it might be better if the SHOULD is removed from QUIC transport, but I will
defer to the experts here.

Regards,
Rob