It would be helpful if the authors suggested codepoints, rather than have IANA choose. It looks to me like some of these frame types in particular would benefit from some having one byte encodings, others two bytes (4 or 8 might even make some sense for some, but I don't think that's necessary for standards track RFCs).
On Thu, Dec 11, 2025, at 09:01, David Dong via RT wrote: > Dear Jana Iyengar, Ian Swett, Martin Thomson (cc: quic WG), > > As the designated experts for the QUIC registries, can you review the > registration proposals in draft-ietf-quic-multipath-18 for us? These > were already previously allocated as provisional registrations in -15 > and some in a prior version of this document (I've copied the thread > below). Please see: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-quic-multipath/ > > The due date is December 24th. > > If this is OK, we'll update the assignment at: > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/quic/ > > Unless you ask us to wait for the other reviewers, we’ll act on the > first response we receive. > > With thanks, > > David Dong > IANA Services Sr. Specialist > > -- > > On Thu Jul 10 00:52:51 2025, [email protected] wrote: >> Thanks David. >> >> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025, at 09:33, David Dong via RT wrote: >> > Hi Martin, >> > >> > Thank you for your review and clarifications. I've updated/added the >> > below, and will pass your message to the authors as well regarding >> > shorter codepoints for permanent registration: >> > >> > QUIC Transport Parameters: >> > 0x0f739bbc1b666d0d initial_max_path_id provisional >> > [draft-ietf-quic-multipath-15, >> > Section 2.1] 2025-07-09 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> > >> > QUIC Frame Types: >> > 0x15228c00-0x15228c01 PATH_ACK provisional [draft-ietf- >> > quic-multipath-15, >> > Section 4.1] 2023-07-26 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> > 0x15228c05 PATH_ABANDON provisional [draft-ietf-quic- >> > multipath-15, >> > Section 4.2] 2023-07-26 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> > ... >> > 0x15228c07 PATH_STATUS_BACKUP provisional [draft-ietf- >> > quic-multipath-15, >> > Section 4.3] 2023-11-03 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> > 0x15228c08 PATH_STATUS_AVAILABLE provisional [draft-ietf- >> > quic-multipath-15, >> > Section 4.3] 2023-11-03 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> > 0x15228c09 PATH_NEW_CONNECTION_ID provisional [draft-ietf- >> > quic-multipath-15, >> > Section 4.4] 2025-07-09 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> > 0x15228c0a PATH_RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID provisional >> > [draft-ietf-quic-multipath-15, >> > Section 4.5] 2025-07-09 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> > 0x15228c0c MAX_PATH_ID provisional [draft-ietf-quic- >> > multipath-15, >> > Section 4.6] 2025-07-09 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> > 0x15228c0d PATHS_BLOCKED provisional [draft-ietf-quic- >> > multipath-15, >> > Section 4.7] 2025-07-09 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> > 0x15228c0e PATH_CIDS_BLOCKED provisional [draft-ietf- >> > quic-multipath-15, >> > Section 4.7] 2025-07-09 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> > >> > QUIC Transport Error Codes: >> > 0x004150504142414e APPLICATION_ABANDON_PATH Path abandoned >> > at the >> > application's request provisional [draft-ietf-quic-multipath-15, >> > Section 4.2.1] 2025-07-09 Yanmei Liu >> > [Yanmei_Liu] >> > 0x004e4f5f4349445f NO_CID_AVAILABLE_FOR_PATH Path abandoned >> > due to no >> > available connection IDs for the >> > path provisional [draft-ietf-quic-multipath-15, Section >> > 4.2.1] 2025-07-09 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> > 0x0052534c494d4954 PATH_RESOURCE_LIMIT_REACHED Path abandoned >> > due to >> > resource limitations in the >> > transport provisional [draft-ietf-quic-multipath-15, Section >> > 4.2.1] 2025-07-09 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> > 0x00554e5f494e5446 APPLICATION_ABANDON_PATH Path abandoned >> > due to >> > unstable interfaces provisional [draft-ietf-quic-multipath-15, >> > Section >> > 4.2.1] 2025-07-09 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> > >> > Registry: >> > https://www.iana.org/assignments/quic/ >> > >> > Best regards, >> > >> > David Dong >> > IANA Services Sr. Specialist >> > >> > On Wed Jul 09 02:14:13 2025, [email protected] wrote: >> >> Hi David, >> >> >> >> Anything already registered as provisional can stay there, maybe >> >> with >> >> updated references or names for those listed in this new request. >> >> My >> >> understanding is that these are simply label changes, not semantic >> >> changes. That only makes it slightly more annoying to match >> >> registry >> >> to older versions of the draft, but there is no interoperability >> >> hazard here. (Note that QUIC does not depend on frames being >> >> globally >> >> unique, but we set the registry up that way because it wasn't worth >> >> the headaches of multiple registrations for the same codepoint.) >> >> >> >> The old registrations for transport parameters cannot be overridden >> >> in >> >> that way. That registry genuinely does need to be unique. So those >> >> old registrations need to stay. >> >> >> >> Any new registrations would then be added, with the new reference. >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 9, 2025, at 12:04, David Dong via RT wrote: >> >> > Hi Martin, >> >> > >> >> > Some of the QUIC Frame Types codepoints in this request were >> >> > requested >> >> > by a previous version of this document and they were assigned as >> >> > provisional as well (it looks like there are some changes to the >> >> > existing entries in the registries. Others also don't appear in >> >> > the >> >> > current version of the draft as well; I can ask the authors about >> >> > them): >> >> > >> >> > QUIC Transport Parameters >> >> > --- >> >> > 0x0f739bbc1b666d05 enable_multipath provisional >> >> > [draft- >> >> > ietf-quic-multipath-05, >> >> > Section 3] 2023-07-26 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> >> > 0x0f739bbc1b666d06 enable_multipath(-06) provisional >> >> > [draft- >> >> > ietf-quic-multipath-06, >> >> > Section 3] 2023-11-03 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> >> > >> >> > QUIC Frame Types >> >> > --- >> >> > 0x15228c00-0x15228c01 ACK_MP provisional [draft-ietf-quic- >> >> > multipath-05, >> >> > Section 8.1] 2023-07-26 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> >> > 0x15228c05 PATH_ABANDON provisional [draft-ietf-quic- >> >> > multipath-05, >> >> > Section 8.2] 2023-07-26 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> >> > 0x15228c06 PATH_STATUS provisional [draft-ietf-quic- >> >> > multipath-05, >> >> > Section 8.3] 2023-07-26 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> >> > 0x15228c07 PATH_STANDBY provisional [draft-ietf-quic- >> >> > multipath-06, >> >> > Section 8.3] 2023-11-03 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> >> > 0x15228c08 PATH_AVAILABLE provisional [draft-ietf-quic- >> >> > multipath-06, >> >> > Section 8.4] 2023-11-03 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> >> > >> >> > QUIC Transport Error Codes >> >> > --- >> >> > 0x1001d76d3ded42f3 MP_PROTOCOL_VIOLATION Multipath protocol >> >> > violation provisional [draft-ietf-quic-multipath-05, >> >> > Section >> >> > 9] 2023-07-26 Yanmei Liu [Yanmei_Liu] >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Just to confirm, do we have approval to assign these new >> >> > registrations >> >> > as requested with the status field set to "Provisional"? These >> >> > three >> >> > existing provisional codepoints will have the Frame Type Name >> >> > updated: >> >> > >> >> > 0x15228c00-0x15228c01 >> >> > From "ACK_MP" to "PATH_ACK" >> >> > >> >> > 0x15228c07 >> >> > From "PATH_STATUS_BACKUP" to "PATH_STANDBY" >> >> > >> >> > 0x15228c08 >> >> > From "PATH_STATUS_AVAILABLE" to "PATH_AVAILABLE" >> >> > >> >> > Thank you. >> >> > >> >> > Best regards, >> >> > >> >> > David Dong >> >> > IANA Services Sr. Specialist >> >> > >> >> > On Tue Jul 08 22:05:58 2025, [email protected] wrote: >> >> >> These seem best as provisional registrations. If I were to >> >> >> advise >> >> >> the >> >> >> authors, I would suggest that they look for shorter codepoints in >> >> >> the >> >> >> long term, so any permanent registration should wait for that. >> >> >> >> >> >> It's probably good to get these on the books if people are going >> >> >> to >> >> >> deploy code based on these codepoints, but provisional >> >> >> registration >> >> >> is >> >> >> ideal, especially if they might change. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 9, 2025, at 06:25, David Dong via RT wrote: >> >> >> > Dear Jana Iyengar, Ian Swett, Martin Thomson, >> >> >> > >> >> >> > As the designated experts for the QUIC registries, can you >> >> >> > review >> >> >> > the >> >> >> > registration proposal below? If it's OK, we'll make the >> >> >> > assignment >> >> >> > at: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > https://www.iana.org/assignments/quic/ >> >> >> > >> >> >> > These all appear to fall within the Specification Required >> >> >> > ranges; >> >> >> > could you let us know if these should be made as permanent >> >> >> > registrations, or should we treat this as an RFC 7120 early >> >> >> > allocation >> >> >> > for draft-ietf-quic-multipath-15 (in which case we will need >> >> >> > the >> >> >> > approval of one of the quic WG Chairs and the AD)? >> >> >> > >> >> >> > The IESG has asked us to request that reviews be returned >> >> >> > within >> >> >> > two >> >> >> > weeks, which in this case would make the due date July 22nd. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > With thanks, >> >> >> > >> >> >> > David Dong >> >> >> > IANA Services Sr. Specialist >> >> >> > >> >> >> > On Tue Jul 08 04:08:53 2025, [email protected] wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Contact Name: >> >> >> >> Yanmei Liu >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Contact Email: >> >> >> >> [email protected] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Type of Assignment: >> >> >> >> We want to add 1 transport parameter, 10 frame types, and 4 >> >> >> >> transport >> >> >> >> error codes for Multipath Extension for QUIC (draft-15). >> >> >> >> 1. transport parameter which need to be added to the "QUIC >> >> >> >> Transport >> >> >> >> Parameters" registry under the "QUIC Protocol" heading: >> >> >> >> initial_max_path_id (0x0f739bbc1b666d0d) >> >> >> >> 2. 10 new frame types which need to be added to the "QUIC >> >> >> >> Frame >> >> >> >> Types" >> >> >> >> registry under the "QUIC Protocol" heading: >> >> >> >> - PATH_ACK (0x15228c00-0x15228c01) >> >> >> >> - PATH_ABANDON (0x15228c05) >> >> >> >> - PATH_STATUS_BACKUP (0x15228c07) >> >> >> >> - PATH_STATUS_AVAILABLE (0x15228c08) >> >> >> >> - PATH_NEW_CONNECTION_ID (0x15228c09) >> >> >> >> - PATH_RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID (0x15228c0a) >> >> >> >> - MAX_PATH_ID (0x15228c0c) >> >> >> >> - PATHS_BLOCKED (0x15228c0d) >> >> >> >> - PATH_CIDS_BLOCKED (0x15228c0e) >> >> >> >> 3. 4 Transport Error Codes for multipath extension are to be >> >> >> >> added >> >> >> >> to >> >> >> >> the "QUIC Transport Error Codes" registry under the "QUIC >> >> >> >> Protocol" >> >> >> >> heading: >> >> >> >> - APPLICATION_ABANDON_PATH (0x004150504142414e) >> >> >> >> - PATH_RESOURCE_LIMIT_REACHED (0x0052534c494d4954) >> >> >> >> - PATH_UNSTABLE_INTERFACE (0x00554e5f494e5446) >> >> >> >> - NO_CID_AVAILABLE_FOR_PATH (0x004e4f5f4349445f) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Details of these parameters and frame types can be found in >> >> >> >> document: >> >> >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-quic- >> >> >> >> multipath- >> >> >> >> 15#name-iana-considerations >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Registry: >> >> >> >> QUIC IANA name space: >> >> >> >> https://www.iana.org/assignments/quic/quic.xhtml >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Description: >> >> >> >> Multipath Extension for >> >> >> >> QUIC(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-quic- >> >> >> >> multipath- >> >> >> >> 15) has been in the last call of IETF QUIC Working Group. >> >> >> >> Registration >> >> >> >> for code points of the latest version is necessary for interop >> >> >> >> tests. >> >> >> >> As draft-15 has been reviewed by most people, we believe it's >> >> >> >> very >> >> >> >> close to the RFC version. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Additional Info: >> >> >> >> 1. Multipath extension for QUIC: >> >> >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-quic- >> >> >> >> multipath- >> >> >> >> 15#name-iana-considerations >> >> >> >> 2. QUIC IANA name space: >> >> >> >> https://www.iana.org/assignments/quic/quic.xhtml
