IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: H2: Should there be a limit to tolerance ?

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Fri, 17 February 2017 22:08 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 31D821296E0 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 14:08:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 RCrb2lrmIHKN for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 14:08:57 -0800 (PST)
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 C208E129551 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 14:08:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1ceqew-0003pF-Fx for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 22:05:46 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 22:05:46 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1ceqew-0003pF-Fx@frink.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([128.30.52.76]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1ceqep-0003oK-5J for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 22:05:39 +0000
Received: from mail-qk0-f174.google.com ([209.85.220.174]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1ceqei-0007WN-Is for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 22:05:33 +0000
Received: by mail-qk0-f174.google.com with SMTP id s186so56613365qkb.1 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 14:05:12 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=JKdGYeDSmV88fxQXJpu3X8AJvLjSEc3wbSNIOO0m8X0=; b=RHeKd54911zIfNjodM6YPTlXaL+/Nm9IsQb90Sn76KZQMPtae1DcxvxSfWP/dudEIl MzWwZDOfkoEZ6G2s7mAn0AOTv88h1hiH9PRRHKz3t9v7APPIRJhqgppUm5Awa1nAN1t0 Erl0jQWbQd9jLJDYj19ZOYXDH9RfaF4lVXvUmTo050A/7tV7ZgjDprdAikrhdAF3ZEqp vXvQXC9mFyEbY1Zh5MXHVw0DiyrmG38Ba0ZfrqUtqQ5j6EGN82yqtTVYWUX914FYqAVK VwCgyKdqEBb5Aa7TmgAMSlh4HSfIBYbf0cpgKsRDX6Viip4Rpu5VY/oHZ2sAhWFIpHuR wkAg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=JKdGYeDSmV88fxQXJpu3X8AJvLjSEc3wbSNIOO0m8X0=; b=g6bFZv+ILsHiGoJgjo80fFQKlpcMEKS3hvStYhnWuazb1Yfr79zDYhiEUdF1s7Qcot /1vY1KA3y1nHpKMJqtiaBaXvuO8klayE8Gx1KzIHtvhEYvuhdsjsmjy3WliyzTzvUwis XRcjUc5YOh7wmIrW6drRHNq7Mcdjw5a8kN2oeCXkXWX866s/0CxtAUhbdTA8pKVKMcF9 l77xrs3uwQOgT6dIvGB4U3FCU4kbXJbdiQNFzR79tm3/jEGccAl8PEHk0aZilI6jz7A1 rYkyDi89f8yHNw+4SBw1cgMk7B/w7kzBLTpdTahfA2wKOO+Ne2wBtVxyDVULrNYRdTTv PLKQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39koiZe7Yc8R97AgwAwtFbFtFVod75K1JqjPhffxO8rjG8R+K5IiIX6hKOMZf2GFMDmnaUY3sHeDxGNbJg==
X-Received: by 10.55.151.7 with SMTP id z7mr10219355qkd.316.1487369106512; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 14:05:06 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.19.112 with HTTP; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 14:05:06 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <98899.1487330229@critter.freebsd.dk>
References: <90502.1487325120@critter.freebsd.dk> <D199BE90-58D7-4E1B-A223-82A7D40651DF@greenbytes.de> <98899.1487330229@critter.freebsd.dk>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2017 09:05:06 +1100
Message-ID: <CABkgnnVuWHQkpcu3yxAxisxziGqMmJ_vKVStUn-1UdbBKak0HQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc: Stefan Eissing <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.220.174; envelope-from=martin.thomson@gmail.com; helo=mail-qk0-f174.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.1
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.136, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1ceqei-0007WN-Is b07ea23ebecc0a0f4fa8a92974af90c0
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: H2: Should there be a limit to tolerance ?
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABkgnnVuWHQkpcu3yxAxisxziGqMmJ_vKVStUn-1UdbBKak0HQ@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/33578
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 17 February 2017 at 22:17, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:
> But what if the counterpart just keeps hammering you with frames
> which you ignore ?
>
> What if it keeps hammering you with *only* frames which get ignored ?
>
> What if it does so at very high rate, because it is buggy or hostile ?
>
> What if the buggy implementation was in several million Internet-Of-Shit
> things that got poured into concrete years ago ?
>
> There's got to be _some_ limit to patience ?

See http://httpwg.org/specs/rfc7540.html#dos

I realize that we don't mention unknown frame types.  That's an oversight.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email