Re: 0-RTT Design for HTTP/2

Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com> Wed, 16 December 2020 12:30 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 3ACF33A0A2D for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 04:30:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.248
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.248 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 oLpHN4gR6HCA for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 04:30:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lyra.w3.org (lyra.w3.org [128.30.52.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A3373A0A29 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 04:30:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1kpVuO-0003Y9-Ak for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 12:27:56 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 12:27:56 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1kpVuO-0003Y9-Ak@lyra.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([128.30.52.79]) by lyra.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ianswett@google.com>) id 1kpVuM-0003XR-EF for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 12:27:54 +0000
Received: from mail-yb1-xb32.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::b32]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ianswett@google.com>) id 1kpVuK-0002Kj-Kq for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 12:27:54 +0000
Received: by mail-yb1-xb32.google.com with SMTP id w135so22177420ybg.13 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 04:27:52 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=KlRWvU/5HmqjKLtCUeoiuN4Rcc146sfJu68Oq9DMqXk=; b=XinPP/Kj9eky8go5NozHZ7RnKs6e0zsxS25/P/trEqWDX8+i3R8ZSAMmnDXYoolfIQ rAXKTJH7SWDO8eZgEMuTBF4msm6OTuXUhAkuNY7mgCFuVaelCgUhUxEv1MVdB3rVFDv0 bu0Y6yhHECZUJKBvuvl4NAfEtGDZd1hegsqLIIkrXVuAP+/dqsM0XJ4GcV5Kwru+YVUX psgiI0z0zeAWk4qLrw9VwvjVoGRCuio+U4xuUvbErh9n4vazzR9jUtzuHnmY3eFe7TVS YnlAtRri3rU0YZeh80xmxcnn4W7Avc6R0/rnsFVOU+Jf/AEgp2NYPEFzZymQGu+yVS9N C3sQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=KlRWvU/5HmqjKLtCUeoiuN4Rcc146sfJu68Oq9DMqXk=; b=MI3Vuyw/Y3wCHH4VSX+Pi8RZMMOG+YjFKZ82j48PGL6GfDW1ZZkjcIR6FEyYxg8Nni O80C6mQr8f9bI8MmMz5OCHq1IJrEEZhiT8WOl9kzfp/bylRd1RVDWZ7TgMrROWnGaWLi hti1CZH9XyuVHqAltToDDRNEEp+jo/S/jY5x2HBxkDCP+baFgTXiijBcTnm7qHVmx2oM DpFG5cOheKMeO5WOMtaKBkvHBxGKeeCSqbRl0DnP2pIg0hfk7e85PQ9oHgLP8kWxKpQx llZ5lKnVginrU1y4dEQvxWmwfF0940GS0Ew86v3wOizqxHxcJuZB4tN+FqPqEfTS+Dhj DXsg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5313h22A5r82igjoz1rooydK/UT0RycO14bilAYqpWHp9MqstLhY Zzbjo7fNeB2Aaoq9X+b9ILBYA2GzTyjkGw2MsjlBet1mNKtzvA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxEsvydXl/OQcRNuatB7EYM+kmLjWC4Ip5y3C+QglqZ9uLvDNPw/vcZVrX5gfTWBGujgGwODSnVaiDANKQetO0=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:c095:: with SMTP id c143mr41088926ybf.119.1608121661413; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 04:27:41 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <126ee381-7828-451f-865a-db6357928243@www.fastmail.com> <CAH_hAJEmDzfsQQ_V9vpFkGAZcXHtfKzfSDM0r6WJERb6y0_qMA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAH_hAJEmDzfsQQ_V9vpFkGAZcXHtfKzfSDM0r6WJERb6y0_qMA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 07:27:30 -0500
Message-ID: <CAKcm_gP=2uix9wd_uOw9JgR2OeobNPAdR4s7Sp=r6CEUEng58g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk>
Cc: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000062def405b6940091"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::b32; envelope-from=ianswett@google.com; helo=mail-yb1-xb32.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-19.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1kpVuK-0002Kj-Kq 8df422d6c23a553704b9ef1e04788159
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: 0-RTT Design for HTTP/2
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/CAKcm_gP=2uix9wd_uOw9JgR2OeobNPAdR4s7Sp=r6CEUEng58g@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/38312
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: <https://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Thanks for writing this up.  I need to talk with others before being sure
this is something we'd be interested in, but it seems likely.

Before we get to that, one Q on deployability: Does the working group think
enough of the ecosystem can handle this new EARLY_DATA_SETTINGS setting?
If no one sends it, even if they support the functionality, it sort of
defeats the purpose.

Ian



On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 5:36 AM Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk> wrote:

> On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 at 07:15, Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net> wrote:
> >
> > As part of our adoption call for HTTP/2 (reprise), I opened
> https://github.com/httpwg/http2-spec/issues/781 regarding the use of TLS
> early data.
> >
> > I thought that it might be worth the time to go through the exercise of
> defining an extension to h2 that enabled saving of settings across
> connections.  Here it is:
> >
> >
> https://martinthomson.github.io/h2-0rtt/draft-thomson-httpbis-h2-0rtt.html
> >
> > For those who prefer text:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thomson-httpbis-h2-0rtt-00
> >
> > Though this is conceptually simple (indicate 1 if you are prepared to
> remember settings), there are enough fiddly details here that I'm now
> unsure whether it is worthwhile trying to roll into our revision of HTTP/2.
>
> I am somewhat nervous here about how many servers will implement this.
>
> Typical OSS server implementations have a somewhat arms-length
> relationship with their TLS stack. This tends to mean they don't
> actually know exactly when new session ticket messages were sent.
> While this is not a hard limitation (OpenSSL has the requisite
> functions) it's the kind of barrier to entry that could be quite
> awkward. This may also lead to limitations in how many HTTP/2 stacks
> go through the effort of implementing the extension.
>
> With that said, I'm sure that CDNs and browsers would, and that may be
> enough.
>
> >
> > I'm interested in what people think about this.  One of the major
> criticisms of the current arrangement is the time it takes to learn that an
> extension is available and this could help with that.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Martin
> >
>
>