Re: question about QPACK decode framing

Dmitri Tikhonov <> Wed, 31 October 2018 21:15 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09962130E3C for <>; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:15:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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 xZNsI0t1ouSg for <>; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:15:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::830]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2A41130E90 for <>; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:15:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id l41-v6so18861256qtl.8 for <>; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:15:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=IL2j82afmXxYACbQQVP22rjGAzE6ggYfTF3SUuXjb4c=; b=Fw0GYD0l5pNlBO5IiJBpisGA9X4HMf+PrnyVWKrEe065Ea81HNyZDKZmujiY2fUY8h nNPS+ZtRuSMhfBr5IyOtirna52/6hVwt90XRTv8XCm514tVJ118P4PgsU1NgmNlkewJr v7hzTaeyo9RCMJanHfHy+JJ0FQSDDEDPysb3iXloFA023cf6nhP0L7vmHF2bE7g14f8V JB9WCMpGJnuo811EHhBBcPAOyjlVw1QI9OtUrs8LwXeemrslTh/uLNARpmW37VIvFzU7 s3kmicVhIXq7exCEkhHgzQkAhn2ELj9+iwXu5vtgv52q45WZwONTij9H97+jceBNmKZU R4gA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=IL2j82afmXxYACbQQVP22rjGAzE6ggYfTF3SUuXjb4c=; b=qX/KdT+dWdkQwa3WI+xjDqj+HlLgWciMwuJICVB7HZ8JT12g77u927jJ4nf086q0vE L+wjzlRTBTH5yL5yqHawcoMq3Wjj6MlsNNRf75WIQ7YQUpnJafrO6FlkAneqMty4DzI4 UeeyRO7PGUb0bWO7F9F2i1eu/oqqBxdXn0JSO8/fYlXfej6uEIDq3dHrGS9A4qLG0Gv5 1IJKByfnBZnO7/0IWzsRHiyvfSRRavt1KfzHPtXM6jHonE5vujODqTXHI0L6eF6RrNiY Y80LC/sdHSDSU8LNBuVeb9KghctqSIimp3BI4pl2jkWmP8Xxp28O50HM7R83KzFTC4FE X0/A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gLvtD4Uv5ZYlcrplr9cZ2Y4pOW3yKgOYzMMDYgUD6ffgYK4FG24 NTVxXXboVVBQQcTIzv3fPtYQlQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5fTG/Zu33+JiG1tWelK9b+V3aMpPvXvjtestz32qxOsF6xbk/xmNThbOznD/JPTIaS4GNGH2Q==
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7119:: with SMTP id z25-v6mr4287743qto.270.1541020523732; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:15:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ubuntu-dmitri ( []) by with ESMTPSA id u27-v6sm25895700qth.39.2018. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:15:23 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 17:15:18 -0400
From: Dmitri Tikhonov <>
To: Brian Swander <>
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: question about QPACK decode framing
Message-ID: <20181031211518.GA9622@ubuntu-dmitri>
Mail-Followup-To: Brian Swander <>, "" <>
References: <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
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: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 21:15:37 -0000

Hi Brian,

(I am assuming you're talking about processing the header block.)

The header block is in the HQ "HEADERS" frame which has a length.
Depending on your implementation, you may be able to tell if you
have the complete header block buffered.

  - Dmitri.

On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 08:57:27PM +0000, Brian Swander wrote:
> Is there a way to determine that we are decoding a complete set of headers a priori?   I.e. is the "headers length" encoded anywhere?   Or does decode (control stream) just have to handle the case where we only have a partial header, and we just pend and wait for more data before continuing?
> Thanks
> bs