Hi, On Apr 17, 2025, at 11:09, Kazuho Oku <kazuho...@gmail.com> wrote: > Though I kind of wonder if we could agree on how to annotate ACK packets. At > the moment, Multipath QUIC adds a path identifier and uses a different frame > type. This pull request adds a new field for acks, reusing the original frame > type. > > I think people have argued that we do not need to develop an encoding scheme > that allows extensions add new fields to the ACK frame. I fully agree with > that. > > But at the same time, I wonder if extensions could agree on one way of > annotating ACKs rather than trying to define their own ways.
agree with Kazuho. It seems like there is a desire to muck with the ACK format/content; let's try and ake this minimally painful for implementers. Thanks, Lars
