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

Magnus wglc #3881

Merged
merged 13 commits into from
Jul 14, 2020
Merged

Magnus wglc #3881

merged 13 commits into from
Jul 14, 2020

Conversation

martinthomson
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

...even when the sender wants to say something, if the sender is blocked
for long enough.
Just a little more context and a reference to the TLS spec.

Note that this somewhat assumes that #3879 will proceed, as this gives a
pointer to a single section, rather than three.
@martinthomson martinthomson added editorial An issue that does not affect the design of the protocol; does not require consensus. -transport labels Jul 9, 2020
Number fields. The first byte contains the Reserved and Packet Number Length
bits. Between the Source Connection ID and Length fields, there are two
additional fields specific to the Initial packet.
Number fields; see {{long-header}}. The first byte contains the Reserved and
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This text needs to be replicated to the 0-RTT and Handshake packet also.

PATH_RESPONSE with its own PATH_CHALLENGE.
An endpoint MAY bundle PATH_CHALLENGE and PATH_RESPONSE frames that are used
for path validation with other frames. In particular, an endpoint may pad a
packet carrying a PATH_CHALLENGE for Path Maximum Transfer Unit (PMTU)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is it worth adding a reference to the PMTU section here?

validation until after a peer sends the next non-probing frame to its new
address.

Path validation is necessary verify reachability of a peer on a new network
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
Path validation is necessary verify reachability of a peer on a new network
Path validation is necessary to verify reachability of a peer on a new network

@martinthomson martinthomson merged commit cc1de04 into master Jul 14, 2020
@martinthomson martinthomson deleted the magnus-wglc branch July 14, 2020 22:58
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.

3 participants