Richard Levitte

From discussions both here and in #18610, it seems that we have different views on if the TX and RX Frame handlers should work with a pull model or a...

> **OTC: Should we ignore limits from RFC 5280's appendix A.1?** No

> In my opinion this is wrong and we should not ignore the limits from RFC. The FQDN does NOT have to be in CN as the FQDN should be...

Do I understand correctly that this replaces #18870?

There's a thing I didn't notice before: `ossl_quic_wire_encode_padding()` and `ossl_quic_wire_decode_padding()`, is there a reason they don't have `_frame_` in the name?

> Just change the rule in https://github.com/openssl/openssl/blob/master/util/markdownlint.rb#L9 to exclude it. I did not like requiring the indented style anyway. And please unify the markup in the document in one way...

I have to agree with @t8m, that the [example code](https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/16778#issuecomment-1183976270) seems somehow wrong to create a common resource outside of the created threads, and then expect the threads to somehow...

A lot of other functionality is currently not in place and not even in PRs, so there are a lot of comments with the key words "ADD CODE" and "ASSUMPTIONS"...

This has now been adapted with #18870 and #18612 in mind

I'll do more adaptation to minimize it further, so we can do some very minimal preliminary tests