Re: H2 Implementation Debug State URI

Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk> Wed, 10 August 2016 09:55 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0731E12B057 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 02:55:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.168
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.168 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.247, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lukasa-co-uk.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZB-RS6tPXHW7 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 02:55:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E54812D50A for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 02:55:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1bXQAY-000411-PP for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 09:51:26 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 09:51:26 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1bXQAY-000411-PP@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <cory@lukasa.co.uk>) id 1bXQAQ-0003zi-2y for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 09:51:18 +0000
Received: from mail-wm0-f42.google.com ([74.125.82.42]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <cory@lukasa.co.uk>) id 1bXQAM-0004UY-Vy for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 09:51:17 +0000
Received: by mail-wm0-f42.google.com with SMTP id q128so82522482wma.1 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 02:50:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lukasa-co-uk.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=33ozrENFwd+jD+9zyp561PLySSjsqLG9oFrxNaI9kVE=; b=0TZos4Pks7N/ISfd59GwELGdIJYbxV7FQB/3U65mdK1Ul2ZutVRoS/NwXr8DL7ZzSw /K2KVw2JQG1nHyYIdFYA31wT6k/1XQjTq6YL+0ktYvcx/D9daEt9RAKnKShFp0iqtw1F jqJsbAU1VVklSmya2WXkzf+EPC6WTTIqFU1wBKL8ziRWMz3NDu+w9ZFg1XrCJOjRPqmE 3lNCfMmSyGbBN3EUZQLhV/XS9sfw9trFueKP4VjfIYCkML572ijQbQl7OSM725lf8jiR 4Da7n3csx9k4pudZnyjmqPAz/HD8sdufQLKtwNqc6AzoaXnHcvrreEzpLLdbga2szamO 3bTw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=33ozrENFwd+jD+9zyp561PLySSjsqLG9oFrxNaI9kVE=; b=XnnNotIJ7kG9uXjbod9tzqqHLXalA9oW0AMQZEESlQ2nY7tajAMu5Wncfz98O4XAzL utSNMR4Dy2jcaBnegB2p3bAQobiNk9FVCfCvI2+idN9fjACxcUJDGC95AZ0uhPLHSoST GHk9nLNin/xu0TCniT/sXaVE1tYsps2nULPwULKQAlnowxAKzOKdSMrOmqR/YiiNWkJ2 wWjl3/c3dHXeabUCqTXerjdBGL+KWywa4Vg+J2e7jdOP6hWO5mvDAY2i0aRR7o2tMiMM PAwy8OoN7SuZB0XRmjVR23ky2A6V++GYk1dXdYd91R24hv+0S2x82VHlDqD3aTlnuR7v UxPA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkooutk3qPH0xl0EKg7YxC3xGyuoafX/dsquEYTNIT8PpahtOfPHwoTmSE9Kani3IByMg==
X-Received: by 10.28.145.20 with SMTP id t20mr2215414wmd.74.1470822648350; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 02:50:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.7] (240.89.6.51.dyn.plus.net. [51.6.89.240]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v203sm7525171wmv.2.2016.08.10.02.50.47 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 10 Aug 2016 02:50:47 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.0 \(3207.2\))
From: Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <103e0083-1046-f429-a1d1-0d0b384ede60@measurement-factory.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:50:46 +0100
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <418145C6-B3DE-4EC8-A069-03A3F210CAF2@lukasa.co.uk>
References: <63CCB07A-0204-4CF7-B598-9497D7112021@lukasa.co.uk> <4314.1470384112@critter.freebsd.dk> <B4171FD2-B154-4950-BF0C-4B5A4714367F@lukasa.co.uk> <57A4B820.9060300@measurement-factory.com> <44E9A3E7-C2CC-46EE-B198-A2E85273B032@lukasa.co.uk> <5221cf24-e49d-9748-d13c-abe02406beac@measurement-factory.com> <4CC78A66-5617-46D0-AC91-6D2FB7E39332@lukasa.co.uk> <103e0083-1046-f429-a1d1-0d0b384ede60@measurement-factory.com>
To: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3207.2)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=74.125.82.42; envelope-from=cory@lukasa.co.uk; helo=mail-wm0-f42.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-0.817, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1bXQAM-0004UY-Vy dbde87af622e6788d415f678ce16f15e
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: H2 Implementation Debug State URI
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/418145C6-B3DE-4EC8-A069-03A3F210CAF2@lukasa.co.uk>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32244
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

> On 9 Aug 2016, at 16:59, Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com> wrote:
> 
> On 08/09/2016 03:50 AM, Cory Benfield wrote:
> 
>> For those that don’t add support, they blindly forward the request
>> on, running the risk of information leakage and invalid/incorrect
>> responses.
> 
> I do not see how Max-Forwards unsupporting proxies can have a
> significant negative effect on the problem you are trying to solve.
> Obviously, you will not get their debugging state, but that is going to
> happen no matter what -- there will always be proxies that do not
> support your new feature. Why would Max-Forwards unsupporting proxies
> produce invalid responses? They will just forward the response the next
> hop gives them, and that response would be correct or incorrect
> regardless of what they do.
> 
> AFAICT, Max-Forwards essentially lets you interrogate supporting hops.
> Unless you change the protocol to require debugging support, nothing you
> can do will let you interrogate unsupporting hops.
> 
> This overall problem feels very similar to traceroute -- it does not
> always work and not all hops support ICMP TTLs, but it works well enough
> in many cases to remain useful.
> 

I think this summary is true if HPACK information is removed from the debugging output. So using Max-Forwards is conditional on not dumping HPACK. That may be an acceptable compromise.

Cory