Hi Robert, Thanks for the review. I've tracked your discuss comments as a new issue on the QUIC WG GitHub Repo at https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4468
Cheers, Lucas On behalf of QUIC WG Chairs On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 11:42 AM Robert Wilton via Datatracker < [email protected]> wrote: > Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-quic-invariants-12: Discuss > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-quic-invariants/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > DISCUSS: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Hi, > > A trivial discuss that should hopefully be easy to resolve, and it is > plausible > that the resolution may end up being in the QUIC transport document: > > In this document, the unused bits are defined as: > > Figure 4: Version Negotiation Packet > > Only the most significant bit of the first byte of a Version > Negotiation packet has any defined value. The remaining 7 bits, > labeled Unused, can be set to any value when sending and MUST be > ignored on receipt. > > In the QUIC transport document, they are defined as this: > > Figure 14: Version Negotiation Packet > > The value in the Unused field is selected randomly by the server. > Clients MUST ignore the value of this field. Servers SHOULD set the > most significant bit of this field (0x40) to 1 so that Version > Negotiation packets appear to have the Fixed Bit field. > > I would have expected that these two should be consistent as to whether the > Fixed Bit SHOULD be set to 1 or not. Given > draft-thomson-quic-bit-grease-00, > it might be better if the SHOULD is removed from QUIC transport, but I will > defer to the experts here. > > Regards, > Rob > > > > > >
