Skip to content
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

Describe the fields of packets (not packet headers) #1567

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 16, 2018

Conversation

martinthomson
Copy link
Member

Closes #1566.

@martinthomson martinthomson added editorial An issue that does not affect the design of the protocol; does not require consensus. -transport labels Jul 15, 2018
Copy link
Contributor

@ianswett ianswett left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure of the reason for the change, but this looks fine to me.

@kazuho
Copy link
Member

kazuho commented Jul 15, 2018

Thank you for working on the changes. They look good to me.

FWIW, I realized that this is an issue we should fix by noticing that we could have two interpretations of where the token-len and token fields could be located in -13. One interpretation is that it is before the payload assuming that payload is not part of the header, and the other is that it should be after the payload because payload is defined as part of the header.

It is source of confusion as you can see in #1535. While it is true that we will be moving the location of the token fields in #1498, I think this PR is worth the effort to avoid similar confusion in the future.

@martinthomson martinthomson merged commit 34b64f9 into master Jul 16, 2018
@martinthomson martinthomson deleted the packet-packet-header branch July 16, 2018 12:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
-transport editorial An issue that does not affect the design of the protocol; does not require consensus.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants