Re: Spin bit decision

<alexandre.ferrieux@orange.com> Tue, 02 October 2018 12:43 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandre.ferrieux@orange.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 79662124D68 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 05:43:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.291
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.291 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA=2.309, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 WRkbMjdvlmtn for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 05:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from orange.com (mta134.mail.business.static.orange.com [80.12.70.34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 944131277D2 for <quic@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 05:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from opfednr03.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.67]) by opfednr20.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 42Pf2w6Pnnz1yvh; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 14:43:36 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.31.3]) by opfednr03.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 42Pf2w5FsDzDq7J; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 14:43:36 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [10.193.4.89] (10.168.234.4) by OPEXCLILM5D.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup (10.114.31.3) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 14:43:36 +0200
Subject: Re: Spin bit decision
To: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
CC: IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
References: <14531_1538460420_5BB30B04_14531_237_4_c0f3a391-9897-80b0-575b-aa73edad0d52@orange.com> <9A63F295-5DC5-4992-9A9C-A98F72C8430D@eggert.org> <22440_1538469028_5BB32CA4_22440_292_2_8e00a462-2bbf-acf0-1195-74269a0c2fbd@orange.com> <3E3DBC15-FE42-47CF-AF7A-1F2597ED2390@eggert.org>
From: alexandre.ferrieux@orange.com
Message-ID: <24019_1538484216_5BB367F8_24019_26_1_8e6b0d8e-78f0-56c7-e731-da2ff22cb194@orange.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2018 14:41:55 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <3E3DBC15-FE42-47CF-AF7A-1F2597ED2390@eggert.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: fr-xx-moderne
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.168.234.4]
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/wAFR5GiB_DuBRiKalC5G235AJhw>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 02 Oct 2018 12:43:40 -0000

On 10/02/18 12:59, Lars Eggert wrote:
>  >> May I ask why this question is key ? Are you envisioning a situation where
>> v1 would allow for the spin bit as a negotiated option instead of just
>> requiring it ? Added complexity and inferior outcome: what is the
>> motivation ?
> 
> The WG hasn't really discussed yet what requirements level any inclusion of
> the spin bit into the main spec would have, and there could obviously be
> different levels of requirement for clients and servers.
> 
> But irrespective of what - if anything - the spec chooses to say, deployed
> implementations can obviously choose to do whatever they wish, since the spin
> bit is not affecting interoperability at all.

Well, if the spec says that en endpoint MUST copy of flip a bit, an implementor 
would be fairly ill-advised not do comply. And nothing prevents from adding a 
"does it spin ?" criterion to the interop test suite.

Clearly you now have this degree of freedom: weaken that MUST into a MAY or a 
SHOULD, separately for each role. But for what purpose ?


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.