provisional registrations, changing frame type to 0x24 #61
Conversation
Co-authored-by: Marten Seemann <[email protected]>
…we want to have low latency handshake in protocols that use reliable resets)
|
@marten-seemann Makes sense. Switched to using 0x24 for the TP as well. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, but I'd like to get @LPardue's review on this PR, since we're now applying for provisional registration of the transport parameter as well.
|
I'm happy to hold off the TP a little longer. While I certainly hope that there are no reasons that things need to substantially change, the TP is our way to control change ratcheting for this extension. Lets do WGLC with present TP and take a further view. |
|
Oh I forgot to mention this before: if you change the value of the frame type you need to also change the transport parameter value. Though I'd change it to another 4-byte or 8-byte value as @LPardue suggests. |
|
David's right, I missed that |
|
@LPardue @DavidSchinazi Thank you for the comments. Updated the PR so that:
|
Co-authored-by: David Schinazi <[email protected]>
Closes #60.