Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] Recommend non-zero values for footgun TPs (#1806)

From: Mike Bishop <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 17:36:15 +0000 (UTC)

Fixes #1720.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1806

-- Commit Summary --

  * SHOULD NOT shoot self in foot

-- File Changes --

    M draft-ietf-quic-http.md (13)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1806.patch
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1806.diff

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1806

---

From: Kazuho Oku <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 17:42:59 -0700

kazuho commented on this pull request.

> @@ -261,16 +261,23 @@ the stream management.
 All client-initiated bidirectional streams are used for HTTP requests and
 responses.  A bidirectional stream ensures that the response can be readily
 correlated with the request. This means that the client's first request occurs
-on QUIC stream 0, with subsequent requests on stream 4, 8, and so on. HTTP/QUIC
-does not use server-initiated bidirectional streams. The use of unidirectional
-streams is discussed in {{unidirectional-streams}}.
+on QUIC stream 0, with subsequent requests on stream 4, 8, and so on. In order
+to permit these streams to open, an HTTP/QUIC client SHOULD send non-zero values
+for the QUIC transport parameters `initial_max_stream_data_bidi_local`. An
+HTTP/QUIC server SHOULD send non-zero values for the QUIC transport parameters
+`initial_max_stream_data_bidi_remote` and `initial_max_bidi_streams`.

Would it make sense to recommend `initial_max_bidi_streams` to be "no smaller than 100", like what RFC 7540 states?

 These streams carry frames related to the request/response (see {{frames}}).
 When a stream terminates cleanly, if the last frame on the stream was truncated,
 this MUST be treated as a connection error (see HTTP_MALFORMED_FRAME in
 {{http-error-codes}}).  Streams which terminate abruptly may be reset at any
 point in the frame.
 
+HTTP/QUIC does not use server-initiated bidirectional streams. The use of
+unidirectional streams is discussed in {{unidirectional-streams}}.  Both clients
+and servers SHOULD send a non-zero value for the QUIC transport parameter
+`initial_max_uni_streams`.

Would it make sense to state recommend "at least three", considering the fact that there would be the controller stream and the QPACK encoder / decoder streams?

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1806#pullrequestreview-159249101

---

From: MikkelFJ <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 23:47:12 -0700

mikkelfj commented on this pull request.

As I don't really follow HTTP/Q atm., I am not very confident in this - but if QPACK uses static tables only and you are on a constrained device, you would not want to track that much state.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1806#discussion_r220809604

---

From: Kazuho Oku <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 01:46:03 -0700

I do not oppose to your point.

What I am looking for is a general guidance that is similar to what we have in RFC 7540, quote: _”It is recommended that this value be no smaller than 100, so as to not unnecessarily limit parallelism.”_

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1806#discussion_r220840431

---

From: Mike Bishop <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 11:37:07 -0700

@MikeBishop pushed 1 commit.

79440ad  Suggested values of non-zero

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1806/files/c896cc077a2e8810d8e88e51c95e77e190125729..79440adf065895052ed0a9b8fe2336326e6a6b1c

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 12:29:40 -0700

martinthomson approved this pull request.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1806#pullrequestreview-159605567

---

From: martinduke <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2018 21:48:11 +0000 (UTC)

martinduke approved this pull request.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1806#pullrequestreview-160034665

---

From: Mike Bishop <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2018 14:51:31 -0700

Merged #1806 into master.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1806#event-1874534349