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 4CB7F3A0F32 for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 08:12:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: 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: 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 BTHfDCzriT8q for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 08:12:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-il1-x12c.google.com (mail-il1-x12c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12c]) (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 20DBE3A0F31 for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 08:12:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-il1-x12c.google.com with SMTP id v11so6978208ilh.1 for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 08:12:51 -0700 (PDT) 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=Dd64kL8oSwlYnHlBhvpITt1MNdP0GwHQ1cd+HIB9RfU=; b=QpGXScqSpqucnK/79pyYXHnXhD9BFxLdrmNsjFahJLLbfR3MNsXiAZ/eoxyuMCOfhg vaWGY1YIUKMfEGxhh1Gz/Hm31KX9FfV7XfAPppSK7ReQhGLiMHzr1RUrB2crPkZaolYl Tm1RxD5xBZxryubfAHmSHMQ7CDbHrXSzmCoza29VBh9+2r0T5rqvcr1Cmd79OBDWCrB+ F3XRZCsn+bhM4puvev5oiyKPyIayz+/xVslYQDYmrs8XVwwcFaaaUo4dTQnc8O303/JC zTKiY506lNUcbAFmJBHYEuA/ZxU95csoezsrysWML85BSfqldFUNtYRTzGPF0CBvSudW nveA== 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=Dd64kL8oSwlYnHlBhvpITt1MNdP0GwHQ1cd+HIB9RfU=; b=iHMaqd+N/RCaFRCk5u8JbqA9Rc/t3I6QvSEv+pTiVm6FV0BqhcQtCeZ+1eIxAFIk+T ER+jofBWQ1vJlulK+5dgADyQmCyRgRMj6wSMAZFVWDX7TlTSrApyD6LXKiwrYGBHyshG AcfFvMgUC/2JZhaN4M6CM21HaHq9Bj8XbVL6gZbWdj5HI1QUJfqJx/oJFXf9dUlhkgrM 0Jmk/FYqffTZMe5L1QwxyHdIKlMu8i+anRKY1udDlyOEf0Ks0cts25azikpvmT4o/LS+ vfB219XtDHV//n90ghuzChLKNAa/d7AszqDwCP29OchQN4nIqI/v5QQEuUUgLOF2gK2U 3WQg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530/tPCwcZkS5tQTTuRsdODeA8X0Wsc5zOHWxVrMXTbT3lDHjQAA guBb3aHlE5Lj9pQHLpkNpm/M3H6Ploi7msWlpIg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwca181il225UVi97rY6I5Hbz2QSHSAvnITu2jIHrtu2odJ17etO94HCvv8t7qubKUgqlxN4C1iGv42W1zWaRs= X-Received: by 2002:a92:de48:: with SMTP id e8mr6004966ilr.249.1590592368324; Wed, 27 May 2020 08:12:48 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <833A693C-62E6-4889-9954-FCE65A839A7C@eggert.org> In-Reply-To: From: Martin Duke Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 08:12:37 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Is the invariants draft really standards track? To: Ian Swett Cc: Lars Eggert , IETF QUIC WG Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000018b68105a6a2a528" 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: Wed, 27 May 2020 15:12:52 -0000 --00000000000018b68105a6a2a528 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Thanks guys, I'll file an issue and PR, probably next week. On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 7:34 AM Ian Swett wrote: > I was agreeing with MT, but I'm happy to see some more MUSTs added if > people feel that'd be helpful. > > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 2:50 AM Lars Eggert wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On 2020-5-26, at 20:55, Martin Duke wrote: >> > - This draft becomes fully normative on future versions of QUIC >> ("Future versions of QUIC MUST NOT mess with this format..."), or >> >> I agree that it MUST (heh) be normative. If that requires us to stick a >> 2119 keyword somewhere in there, your suggestion would work. >> >> Lars >> > --00000000000018b68105a6a2a528 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thanks guys, I'll file an issue and PR, probably next = week.

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 7:34 AM Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com> wrote:
I was agreeing with MT, = but I'm happy to=C2=A0see some more MUSTs added if people feel that'= ;d be helpful.

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 2:50 AM Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> wrote:
Hi,

On 2020-5-26, at 20:55, Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com> wrote:
> - This draft becomes fully normative on future versions of QUIC ("= ;Future versions of QUIC MUST NOT mess with this format..."), or

I agree that it MUST (heh) be normative. If that requires us to stick a 211= 9 keyword somewhere in there, your suggestion would work.

Lars
--00000000000018b68105a6a2a528--