New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
RX depacketizer (QUIC) #18610
RX depacketizer (QUIC) #18610
Conversation
This is a very early draft with a bunch of missing pieces |
This PR is ready for comments. What needs more detail? What did I forget? Mind you, I'm going on vacation June 23rd -- July 4th, so will not respond much to comments during that period. |
(why the hell did this trigger the fips-change label??????) |
Thanks, @t8m |
I do not yet know the exact conditions when this happens but it has something to do with changes on the to-be-merged-in branch in time of the pushes or in between the pushes. |
The same-ish module as the TX packetizer, handling the opposite direction.
05989bb
to
e9d8b60
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Did we discuss this at OTC yet? We probably should do.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Subject to the overview diagram receiving the appropriate renaming.
IMO: OTC discussion can happen after this is merged and any changes made in a separate PR. Until OTC review, this should be considered as a draft (perhaps add a comment at the top indicating this, lest this draft be pointed at as canonical). There are too many design documents lingering in an unmerged state. |
Agreed, it makes it very difficult to figure out what's what... |
OTOH if we merge them without OTC review they will probably never receive OTC review because we will forget to do it. |
Then maybe we need to start by having these much higher on the priority list of the OTC meetings. |
24 hours has passed since 'approval: done' was set, but as this PR has been updated in that time the label 'approval: ready to merge' is not being automatically set. Please review the updates and set the label manually. |
The same-ish module as the TX packetizer, handling the opposite direction. Reviewed-by: Paul Dale <pauli@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org> (Merged from #18610)
Reviewed-by: Paul Dale <pauli@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org> (Merged from #18610)
The same-ish module as the TX packetizer, handling the opposite direction. Reviewed-by: Paul Dale <pauli@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org> (Merged from openssl#18610)
Reviewed-by: Paul Dale <pauli@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org> (Merged from openssl#18610)
The same-ish module as the TX packetizer, handling the opposite direction.
Ref to companions: #18564 #18570