Hello QUIC Enthusiasts,

IESG review resulted in a few (relatively minor) changes. However, a few of
these affect normative requirements so it's appropriate to gather
group input. If you have a problem with any of them, *please say so very
soon*. If you are fine with all of them, that is also helpful to say.

None of these requested changes were attached to a DISCUSS, so there's
plenty of scope to push back on anything someone finds problematic

Full diff here
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-quic-v2&url2=https://quicwg.github.io/quic-v2/draft-ietf-quic-v2.txt

Normative changes.

(1)
OLD
HTTP servers that support multiple versions reduce the probability of
   incompatibility and the cost associated with QUIC version negotiation
   or TCP fallback.  For example, an origin advertising support for "h3"
   in Alt-Svc SHOULD support QUIC version 1 as it was the original QUIC
   version used by HTTP/3 and therefore some clients will only support
   that version.

NEW
HTTP servers SHOULD support multiple versions to reduce the probability of
incompatibility and the cost associated with QUIC version negotiation or
TCP fallback. For example, an origin advertising support for "h3" in
Alt-Svc should support QUIC version 1 as it was the original QUIC version
used by HTTP/3, and therefore some clients will only support that version.

Rationale: move the normative word out of the example.

(2)
OLD
Clients SHOULD NOT use
   a session ticket or token from a QUIC version 1 connection to
   initiate a QUIC version 2 connection, or vice versa.

NEW: SHOULD NOT->MUST NOT.

Rationale: Since servers MUST validate, allowing clients to violate the
requirement is just setting them up for failure

(3)
NEW
Some clients keep track of paths that do not support QUIC by
    recording failures to connect over those paths.  Such clients SHOULD
    count version 2 and version 1 failures separately, as a path might
    block version 2 but allow version 1.

Rationale: Clients really shouldn't interpret QUICv2 connection failure as
general QUIC failure.

Reply via email to