Marten Seemann

Path validation on a particular path might fail, without the server receiving any packet for that path. When the client then validates another path, this will look like a skipped...

That's true, but you don't know when the PATH_ABANDON arrives. It might be lost / reordered. So you'll need to deal with what looks like non-continuous use of Path IDs...

I would consider this a misbehaviour of the peer. If you refuse to use path IDs available to you, the protocol might get stuck.

What's the justification for having a dedicated MP_PROTOCOL_VIOLATION error? All other QUIC extensions so far have been using the standard PROTOCOL_VIOLATION error, instead of defining their own bespoke version.

I agree that saving one byte for the very first CID is not very valuable, and I agree that it would be a really nice property to only use ACK_MP...

That’s neat, I like this approach. We should definitely add some text, but we don’t need any protocol changes.

By just using a single stream in a connection seems you're giving up on all the benefits of QUIC stream multiplexing. If you really just need a single stream (at...

Are you sure it's a memory leak? How many QUIC connections are you handling? An easy way to check is using the Swarm Prometheus dashboard. `protocol.MaxConnUnprocessedPackets` is 256. `receivedPacket` weighs...

Blocked on https://github.com/libp2p/specs/issues/507.

I think it still is, since we're encoding it as a Protobuf, and the parser will ignore unknown fields. So if you want to preserve unknown fields, you'd need to...