Hey Tommy, On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 3:00 AM Tommy Pauly <[email protected]> wrote:
> The document is describing how bits *could* be used, not actually > suggesting reserving specific ones at this point. > > This same feedback did come up in IESG review, and I believe that there > will be an update to remove details that refer to specific bit ranges to > avoid this danger. > > I’ll let the authors chime in more =) > To summarize the issue, there's only 7 bits that any QUIC version compatible with the Invariants can ever use. Unless client, server and observers all agree what those bits might mean, there's no way to actually use them assuredly. The draft doesn't pay enough attention to highlighting this deployment problem, so there's a risk that the work done to define the bits in the abstract is for nought because the next steps of trying this out for real are unclear. Relying on some private agreements of what the bits might mean isn't safe for several reasons. Cheers Lucas
