Hi folks,

We have now posted draft-ietf-quic-version-negotiation-08 which includes
the minor changes that came out of WGLC. Diff is available here:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-quic-version-negotiation-08
>From the authors' perspective, this is ready to proceed.

Thanks,
David

On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 8:04 PM Lucas Pardue <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> Thank you for the responses to the Working Group Last Call. The chairs are
> happy that the document is ready to move to the next stage of the process.
> Stay tuned for further updates.
>
> Best regards
> Lucas & Matt
> QUIC WG Chairs
>
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 4:32 PM David Schinazi <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Mirja, thank you for your review. Responses inline.
>> David
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 3:14 PM Mirja Kuehlewind <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I reviewed the version negotiation draft and I think it’s ready to
>>> proceed.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I proposed one PR with a small clarification that I thought could be
>>> helpful and I have one comment and a question, which I thought might be
>>> faster to address by mail, so here it comes:
>>>
>>
>> Thanks, we've merged your PR.
>>
>>
>>> My comment/proposal:
>>>
>>> I would find a terminology section actually helpful in order to have all
>>> three terms defined at the same place: "original version", "client's chosen
>>> version", and “negotiated version”. I had to read this multiple time to be
>>> fully clear about the differences. Also another term one could maybe
>>> explicitly define is “first flight”. This term is used in RFC9000 but in
>>> the context of one specific version is probably more clear.
>>>
>>
>> That makes sense. I wrote this up as a PR, please review:
>> https://github.com/quicwg/version-negotiation/pull/107
>>
>> Any my question:
>>>
>>> The Chosen version field in section 3 is defined the following way:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> “The version that the sender has chosen to use for this connection. In
>>> most cases, this field will be equal to the value of the Version field in
>>> the long header that carries this data.”
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Why is this saying in most cases? What are the cases when this would not
>>> be equal? Or is this cover potential different behavior of future version?
>>> Would be could to clarify this!
>>>
>>
>> The latter, I've clarified in this PR:
>> https://github.com/quicwg/version-negotiation/pull/108
>>
>> Mirja
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From: *QUIC <[email protected]> on behalf of David Schinazi <
>>> [email protected]>
>>> *Date: *Wednesday, 13. April 2022 at 11:18
>>> *To: *Matt Joras <[email protected]>
>>> *Cc: *IETF QUIC WG <[email protected]>
>>> *Subject: *Re: Working Group Last Call: QUIC Version Negotiation
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you Matt!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The editors will strive to address editorial comments as they come in.
>>>
>>> To help us with that process, I recommend that everyone review the
>>> latest editor's copy available here:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://quicwg.org/version-negotiation/draft-ietf-quic-version-negotiation.html
>>> <https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=31323334-501d5122-313273af-454445555731-b5772e3ae3fc7520&q=1&e=dd2ebf17-6afb-4150-ba3e-b9ea85018917&u=https%3A%2F%2Fquicwg.org%2Fversion-negotiation%2Fdraft-ietf-quic-version-negotiation.html>
>>>
>>> That way you'll review the latest document with improvements made during
>>> WGLC.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 7:25 PM Matt Joras <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> This email announces the WGLC of the latest QUIC version negotiation
>>> draft[1]. This document has seen significant work and thanks to persistent
>>> effort of the authors and other contributors the design and editorial
>>> content has stabilized. The chairs and authors believe it is ready for a
>>> last call. There are multiple interoperating implementations for compatible
>>> version negotiation, and downgrade prevention has been deployed at scale.
>>> This last call will run through April 26th. Please email any issues to the
>>> list or file them on Github[2].
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Matt & Lucas
>>> QUIC WG Chairs
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-quic-version-negotiation/
>>>
>>> [2] https://github.com/quicwg/version-negotiation
>>> <https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=31323334-501d5122-313273af-454445555731-e2f7a157cd4462af&q=1&e=dd2ebf17-6afb-4150-ba3e-b9ea85018917&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fquicwg%2Fversion-negotiation>
>>>
>>>

Reply via email to