search

quicwg / multipath

In-progress version of draft-ietf-quic-multipath
Other
51 stars 18 forks source link

fix definition of MAX_PATHS frame #354

Closed mirjak closed 4 months ago

mirjak commented 4 months ago

We really need a "flow control" section of some kind, explaining that we expect resource per active path (number space, ack list, pending packets) and per connection ID (memory), and how these resource are protected.

@huitema can you open an issue for that? It should probably be part of the implementation section. However, we might even remove or merge some of the text we have there as things are actually less complicated now. See also PR #358 where I already removed some text that is outdated.

mirjak commented 4 months ago

@huitema as I also wrote in PR #355 I'm currently focusing first of all on defining things normatively only once. Further I really don#t think we should have normative requirements in the example section, so I also move most of this text now into the frame definition section. But I agree that it probably belongs in the path management section. I noticed this as well when I did another full editorial pass in #358. However, the clean up is my first priority now and then I would rather like to make another PR later to check all frame sections and move things accordingly.

huitema commented 4 months ago

@huitema can you open an issue for that? It should probably be part of the implementation section. However, we might even remove or merge some of the text we have there as things are actually less complicated now. See also PR #358 where I already removed some text that is outdated.

See issue #360 .