Matrin, the measurements described are not only feasible, but they are also feasible without an introduction of any new versions of QUIC. It just takes a regular Transport Parameter negotiation in QUIC v1.
See https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ferrieuxhamchaoui-quic-lossbits-03 - Igor > -----Original Message----- > From: Martin Thomson <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2023 6:30 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ippm] QUIC concerns relating to draft-ietf-ippm-explicit-flow- > measurements > > On Thu, May 11, 2023, at 19:44, Giuseppe Fioccola wrote: > > I think your concerns about QUIC are reasonable, but they can be taken > > into account only for the specific application to QUIC, that would > > eventually be defined in a separate draft. > > I think that Lucas' point is that the draft describes something that isn't > likely > to ever be feasible. At a minimum, the draft should be clear about the > conditions that would be necessary to realize this goal. From what I can see, > the conditions involve deploying a new version of QUIC that completely > displaces the existing version of QUIC, which - if not completely impossible - > is at least highly improbable.
