Prepare for adoption #155
Prepare for adoption #155
Conversation
- Move Importance to main schema - Make protocol_type an array of values (related to #146)
- Update changelist
|
For those of you who don't use a local checkout of this to view the resulting HTML after the changes, I've attached them separately: |
draft-marx-qlog-h3-events.md
Outdated
| QPACK I-D [QUIC-QPACK]. QUIC events are defined in a separate document | ||
| [QLOG-QUIC]. | ||
|
|
||
| Feedback and discussion welcome at [TODO](TODO). Readers are advised to refer to |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You could still point people to this repo in order to collect any adoption call feedback. Then, any and all issues can be brought across to the QUIC WG org when the repo is transferred. And we can update the URL to that new one when the adopted -00 gets published.
| @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ informative: | |||
|
|
|||
| --- abstract | |||
|
|
|||
| === beginning the split into two separate documents for quicwg adoption === | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is the intent to delete this file?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Indeed, this one is removed and replaced by the two new ones.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
so uhh, why isn't it git rm'd ? :D
|
Two other points raised by Lucas:
|
|
Do we also need independent versioning of the different schema? How does qlog evolve over the years? For example, say the main schema got published as 1.0, and then work commenced on 2.0. Can there be a QUIC qlog event definitions 1.1 (which is updated say to support QUIC v2) and a 2.1 (which is updated to support QUIC v2 and a new main schema format)? There's a lot of possible bikeshedding here. For now, maybe you just want to keep your linear versioning scheme (qlog 01, 02, and next 03) and make it clear that it is decoupled from any document draft id version. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, but as @LPardue pointed out, don't we need to delete the old documents?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good to me. Thanks Robin for doing this.
I have a couple minor comments and a generic comment about considering making the document more strict in the future.
Right now it reads like a "hands on experience" document, which is a great start but I think the end goal could be to make some of the text more strict to provide more precise guidelines to QLOG (and QLOG tools) implementors.
But that's a separate discussion.
Ship it!
draft-marx-qlog-main-schema.md
Outdated
| @@ -753,14 +777,14 @@ JSON serialization for events grouped by four tuples and QUIC connection IDs: | |||
| events: [ | |||
| { | |||
| time: 1553986553579, | |||
| protocol_type: "TCP_HTTPS2", | |||
| protocol_type: ["TCP", "HTTPS2"], | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why is HTTPS2 and HTTP3 ?
If Secure is implicit with QUIC but not with TCP, maybe this should be ["TCP", "TLS", "HTTP2"] ?
| TODO: pending QUIC working group discussion. This text reflects the initial (qlog | ||
| draft 01 and 02) setup. | ||
|
|
||
| There are several ways of defining qlog events. In practice, we have seen two main |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is fine for now, but it could be more prescriptive in the future.
Allowing total freedom in the events definition can make the development of generic tools harder.
draft-marx-qlog-main-schema.md
Outdated
| event definitions [QLOG-H3]. | ||
|
|
||
| This section defines some basic annotations and concepts the creators of event | ||
| definition documents should follow to ensure a measure of consistency, making it |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is this a SHOULD ? not sure
|
Thanks all for the reviews! @lnicco I fully agree that the current text isn't really fit for a proper I-D and especially eventual RFC. I'm hoping we can make things much stricter and clearer following wg consensus on some main points. I'm also hoping the new editors will help re-write some things when that happens ;) I have just fixed the remarks (hopefully), merged the PR and tried to submit the new drafts to the datatracker.
So you'll probably see some weird emails and the 2 event-definition documents are somewhat delayed behind main-schema, but hopefully things will be sorted soon! |
|
After guidance from the QUIC wg chairs, I have now cancelled submission of:
And instead re-submitted as:
to make it clearer these are adoption candidates. These are both still pending approval from the QUIC wg chairs, so not quite published yet. |
|
The soap continued... apparently this all triggered a bug in datatracker when trying to replace documents that are in pre-adoption with a wg (it's not quite a compiler bug, but I'll take it for now ;)). The chosen solution is to submit the new drafts again, without indicating they replace the old joint h3+quic events draft. The idea is that the backlinking will be corrected post-adoption. For clarity, these are the most recent drafts that the adoption call will be issued for: |
This PR tracks the changes necessary to prepare for adoption by the QUIC wg as defined in #137.
It currently contains all the text changes, still requiring a few other things after they are approved (remove old document files, switch master branch to main, submit updated docs as individual drafts for the adoption call.