Re: Consensus Call on issues closed by the -03 drafts

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Mon, 22 May 2017 23:56 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
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 C953A129462 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 May 2017 16:56:35 -0700 (PDT)
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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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=mnot.net header.b=mzvHPyV3; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=MZcQjNS7
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 Fofe7RJKAfEq for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 May 2017 16:56:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from new1-smtp.messagingengine.com (new1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.221]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC199129458 for <quic@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 May 2017 16:56:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailnew.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32F80956; Mon, 22 May 2017 19:56:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 22 May 2017 19:56:32 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=ItsWA8k9us3uH+szdf vpz9mGJKOuTpz+7MZledLrrCs=; b=mzvHPyV3lcjP3q9+Jivt7RdBJyWqABnni8 Os0bpmnCSgt2gdv80uirymf+fFMGdFB+lTvCXbLTmqn75XDxurTs1qi+wCTIsmfU a3lzvnEprxGMpUjcm4nof+Pwr+apun2Z3dhMEJqeWZfDM1w85myCEUTrq8Pq9WsL yv934CtqAVB3V0CgMUMxUjhqzOZxH5HOWd4gR3HEqaAaS8PQXiFYkEALlspZ5Qvo ZIp2+nANozxe6bbt2qOtuGioGEggnP4gvtQ4LTlkDb1ztgyMYCjaD3n+J88om9F4 qIq+FPw5eBvSubguoqbJCPBOfadU1rL0IWJm4iNcCz02kcLQqczg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=ItsWA8k9us3uH+szdfvpz9mGJKOuTpz+7MZledLrrCs=; b=MZcQjNS7 oLTEGu1rGrKFZNEjZNaMrVPbs0JmKMv+0DdWDPM185a6tIPbfp4hU+LKgZoD/Eup bGllRFcTYILG3i9GsFsXfKry8cSvtzl9SU2Et2zMIt8Sx3GR+11DDxzMNRU5oOGf eVF9fqvhH5kzhI+BaXvfxmAnnTWb9OJ93drySwfWKOwHTfR7pWIEWfw1HEKOthwk c5t9qpV2+kL5XTkwWeCjzHqw0kTqsbP5ipYHxIl5I7vUP4x8Z+9OAkxn4pUPkOOm yPr+2fuzHapLZIqguJmMJY0SD54drfRLMrwY88iKAp/Kx6xbP5A1YO4v7QzaLOxk yQ5eLuJ+v1M+kw==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:rnojWSVE6QH1YtQ5fDYoNIYTthJ_TOIJGl4cS4x81ZVYbalUzHaK3Q>
X-Sasl-enc: oOEHLh7Vy/oetDm/KrazeB5Dq8JvRQPEJq9XlepVFIVX 1495497390
Received: from [192.168.1.18] (cpe-124-188-19-231.hdbq1.win.bigpond.net.au [124.188.19.231]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E13B47E1FB; Mon, 22 May 2017 19:56:29 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Subject: Re: Consensus Call on issues closed by the -03 drafts
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <DC978CD6-248E-4A1C-9464-2F432EC5AB62@mnot.net>
Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 09:56:26 +1000
Cc: Lars Eggert <lars@netapp.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A9AA8465-4102-4BE9-B982-459176080E14@mnot.net>
References: <DC978CD6-248E-4A1C-9464-2F432EC5AB62@mnot.net>
To: IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/wXRTDHArEVfpwtI9HI1TIfG-kYc>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 22 May 2017 23:56:36 -0000

> On 22 May 2017, at 5:56 pm, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> 
> Everyone,
> 
> The -02 drafts incorporate the proposed resolutions to another group of issues, as listed below. 

That's -03, of course.

> 
> Please have a look through them. If there are any resolutions that you feel need more discussion, please bring it up, either here on the mailing list or by commenting on the issue itself. In either case, please explicitly ask for the issue to be re-opened if you want it to be reconsidered.
> 
> If folks do this before the Paris interim, we can hopefully have any necessary discussions before or during the meeting, allowing us to publish the First Implementation Draft afterwards, incorporating any changes needed.
> 
> See <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#resolving-issues> for a reminder about the process we're using here. Even when we have consensus, we can reopen an issue if new information emerges (and that can take a variety of forms).
> 
> This list is also available at <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues?page=2&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aclosed+-label%3Aduplicate+-label%3Aeditorial+-label%3Ahas-consensus&utf8=✓>.
> 
> * #543: Reduce the number of different offset sizes for STREAM   (transport)
> * #542: Don't include timestamps until after the handshake completes   (transport)
> * #513: Create more certainty about 0-RTT transport parameters   (transport)
> * #481: FNV-1a 64   (transport)
> * #451: No rules limit the sending of BLOCKED   (transport)
> * #443: Split WINDOW_UPDATE   (transport)
> * #442: Invert the connection ID logic during the handshake   (transport)
> * #439: Unclear stream close semantics   (transport)
> * #434: PADDING Frame performance   (transport)
> * #432: Specify what concurrent stream limit protects   (transport)
> * #425: Do not require clients to reset initial streams   (transport)
> * #419: Get rid of the concurrent stream limit by advertising a maximum stream ID   (transport)
> * #405: Transport parameter that limits 0-RTT data   (transport tls)
> * #388: Timestamps in acknowledgment of PING?   (transport)
> * #370: Out-of-order Flow Control   (transport)
> * #344: Justify retransmitting handshake packets so slowly   (recovery)
> * #294: Ignore version negotiation if the client version is present   (transport)
> * #284: Ignore Version Negotiation if it was already done   (transport)
> * #267: Server enforcement of 1280 octet packet size   (transport)
> * #265: Define source address validation in the transport   (transport)
> * #264: Define how source address validation interactions with TLS work   (transport tls)
> * #263: Counting closed streams against the concurrent stream limit   (transport)
> * #248: Exemption from congestion control   (transport recovery)
> * #241: What do we do if special packets are lost   (transport)
> * #237: Create a firm recommendation on when to send WINDOW_UPDATE   (transport)
> * #232: New connection ID message   (transport)
> * #227: Encrypt the initial cleartext packets with a deterministic key   (transport)
> * #217: Packet reordering / loss distorts open stream limits   (transport)
> * #200: Race condition between stream creation and MSPC   (transport)
> * #199: Why are reason phrases potentially 65k long?   (transport)
> * #194: Frames should have a length field   (transport)
> * #181: Remove SETTINGS[_ACK]   (transport http)
> * #167: Hash for unencrypted packets   (transport tls)
> * #158: Padding between frames   (transport)
> * #143: Repeating Version Negotiation   (transport)
> * #134: Certificate compression   (transport tls)
> * #123: ACK frame timestamp format   (transport)
> * #89: Version negotiation gaps   (transport)
> * #60: Stateless Reject mechanism needs description   (transport tls)
> * #55: What can change in a different version   (transport)
> * #45: Handshake protocol selection   (transport)
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
> 

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/