IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [QUIC] 2 issues for the hopper: terminology of packet vs sequence # and byte order

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Mon, 07 November 2016 03:35 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@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 9A843129BB9 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Nov 2016 19:35:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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 k3WDrf7M3gPB for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Nov 2016 19:35:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk0-x22c.google.com (mail-qk0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22c]) (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 1C5E8129BB1 for <quic@ietf.org>; Sun, 6 Nov 2016 19:35:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id x190so160214426qkb.0 for <quic@ietf.org>; Sun, 06 Nov 2016 19:35:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=7FzjYE1Wm0erspsSXACKpQwa31QlxVWdvzcQXEl7nJc=; b=Yf3S1Y0ZIPz3QAiVto7gFxpYDwNEkuzhxaqpVp3Dq2ZKj9viLVwP2qccMYfIVeb7O+ Hef7z7ac5/xSaIGmm5A83WaVHzg9GJl1oOOa8eeENxmPkTk8dMDqdg+UGx177/h0+vJ+ 0C+svrt4QICq2Y5eW+sUpqpH721Za3+ntcQg9L8jQy1QYcLemM16uQpGJwbyN0F9Nzgk zyTaKL1ibNq+Cfbev4GE3GGkSE8uXNMt4VpjzqGPfPpeZL2aSGHisi6gxoiHLYt6KZHD 9YuHoXbToai//EqZDJF0XIY1LuNk3gs0eQEdp0P2PiJ4XaJqT+chPe9WoZPOjAH7WSBF 30iA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=7FzjYE1Wm0erspsSXACKpQwa31QlxVWdvzcQXEl7nJc=; b=AJ8FTVL2AnrFHGEBn70xywWsr3TrMj2mA8epJEtmHIdxO61kDoyiylMWDOqFFi1a0a Mon01QAiEYepPu6cwayi4fyrmp5uxSX/SVTC4gUEmgLKKDsmL1D2UyGBMtrjl3UE0Q3E Vx/htoWHtzPb3vApKbRfYR0DCqCU4bDQ0y3LJm6ezTY/2aFqq3t1+XNiIOKi0sa98M2w uaxGKOxqz0mZpF1VuZQiMmPtsn0wOSeEX7dhu8vSYS6JovaGGl2Ex26KYdPzoVpZud/B bWo8cyia8E0Q5zG5R9z2jB0grQJ+d8rVEuPXayRRoYrtYZQPTaymnjKSx+5fABG/5uTP RsIA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvf4o96VWYaJk28UzEGeWpwCt7uj9hBT/Dff9sieFk2DADMqbFWjHgzgvptAoXiU5VGM6GoPNC/5pdWAlA==
X-Received: by 10.55.155.151 with SMTP id d145mr4676695qke.115.1478489717930; Sun, 06 Nov 2016 19:35:17 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.85.7 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Nov 2016 19:35:17 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAOdDvNo_WjE-39uWm49aFH-_TCeaKdik2hsGbSduhowtKqNHqQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOdDvNo_WjE-39uWm49aFH-_TCeaKdik2hsGbSduhowtKqNHqQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2016 14:35:17 +1100
Message-ID: <CABkgnnUHME8J_ERNRAm3AwNusdg2Cqi-2LLMtz0X-Z9dqXLpYw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/nkXxsIXCdN1vJd3B4VK9mNJkjBQ>
Cc: quic@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [QUIC] 2 issues for the hopper: terminology of packet vs sequence # and byte order
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Mon, 07 Nov 2016 03:35:20 -0000

On 5 November 2016 at 08:01, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com> wrote:
> First, editorially draft-hamilton-quic-transport-protocol-01 generally
> refers to packet numbers instead of sequence numbers. There seem to be two
> exceptions to that - in 6.2 and the identifier
> SEQUENCE_NUMBER_LIMIT_REACHED. OTOH
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thomson-quic-tls-01 almost always refers
> to sequence numbers (with one exception). I think SN is not defined, but PN
> is and it should standardize on the PN language.

Thanks Patrick.  They are sequence numbers in TLS, so it's easy to be
lazy.  We should talk about packet numbers when talking about QUIC:

https://github.com/martinthomson/quic-tls/issues/13

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email