IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] Experiment comparing Upgrade and CONNECT handshakes

Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) <ifette@google.com> Wed, 01 December 2010 04:36 UTC

Return-Path: <ifette@google.com>
X-Original-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0179C3A6CCE for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 20:36:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -109.876
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-109.876 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.200, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LyvVD8VFDBBu for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 20:36:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [74.125.121.35]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE8903A6C59 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 20:36:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wpaz9.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz9.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.73]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id oB14bRwD016463 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 20:37:27 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1291178247; bh=Za7SU1JRe2Qo0ZaU2c9kvSFeZSM=; h=MIME-Version:Reply-To:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: Subject:From:To:Cc:Content-Type; b=BHgBbbXB11IERZmota5IJHbQfv+qgC3rOpMZEWkyd92D5VBZBSzcANcmNbkLOAoUj TIoQD2DyTiVwbe4+CrMGg==
Received: from iwn3 (iwn3.prod.google.com [10.241.68.67]) by wpaz9.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id oB14b3jh029636 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 20:37:26 -0800
Received: by iwn3 with SMTP id 3so8012868iwn.12 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 20:37:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:reply-to :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type; bh=jrDj8QT4CiZWhbfzn0Qdrfx9Nqm/QTURKKbW2N73qU4=; b=lh8UtNg5x+hQ6H7Px9eK8RhBFpcOIAZi6NnIv3fOj1WecQ1/DXYojcWGMhDqywklOl b0/4+QVtCcDoAGbbyFcA==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=moJjLPTDe1LJBQbRh2ybmYrakDqUX7VdARhvsZjRYI0ZVhoc/Lmtw13rgLQpD0OXxk 5QLhKG51IFqK94+YGsiA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.36.12 with SMTP id r12mr8380365ibd.156.1291178244924; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 20:37:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.231.37.194 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 20:37:24 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <73686A90-4ADD-47B7-A7AB-1DC342EFD652@apple.com>
References: <AANLkTim_8g-Cb01si00EkvCK5BtXUx3zHsUee1F6JqsD@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimSu1fOGCg0gqX2EFh4v-MkpZuY_-onm3+TO_Z0@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimYpdp-75BQSmhAUfyrQv19LvzF1ouznst+ANUG@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikbycTS51Ein9ybbZ52zcrViFCNBjCmpRGD3yCk@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTim=_Ey_7tSJ0H8OKzip-UcwtJ=YMG5wf_f_qnty@mail.gmail.com> <20101127071644.GB26428@1wt.eu> <AANLkTi=Rqu-hm=Jy-GFf706smD8zEHbeD-oP7dNCN6Ro@mail.gmail.com> <20101127161638.GE26428@1wt.eu> <AANLkTi=snwcb8F89KjpD8tQUYSSBr6YF1OdaGgr1e9Xa@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTi=2M1ubEgR44PL7JpydkaZaOwwimuvhJq=E30+A@mail.gmail.com> <4CF1EFF9.7040803@caucho.com> <AANLkTimotYL70P3Rqwz3uFbf=G3JERkUJqqdEhU6eMEb@mail.gmail.com> <4CF3E676.8040001@caucho.com> <AANLkTimn92qXDa+7HNW79bSSHhEryH0kPCYYbkDsUZRZ@mail.gmail.com> <4CF3F563.3050808@caucho.com> <AANLkTimW3CP-B9TuXhtRYr051eExkMgZPT_Rm7XMp8NK@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimgs8Sw_Witxk+T4tx0_+vHiXdA=Hv6b1wQ4mey@mail.gmail.com> <BB31C4AB95A70042A256109D46199126057903CE@XCH117CNC.rim.net> <73686A90-4ADD-47B7-A7AB-1DC342EFD652@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 20:37:24 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTin4-Ooxk+XY+6FTwij_nKNNiKP7iE+SzYk72tb1@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ)" <ifette@google.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0022152d5f71a16714049651dcd3"
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: Hybi <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] Experiment comparing Upgrade and CONNECT handshakes
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: ifette@google.com
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi>
List-Post: <mailto:hybi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 04:36:24 -0000

On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 6:58 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:

>
> On Nov 30, 2010, at 4:16 PM, Joe Mason wrote:
>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: hybi-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:hybi-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> >> Adam Barth
> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 6:27 PM
> >> To: Brian
> >> Cc: Hybi
> >> Subject: Re: [hybi] Experiment comparing Upgrade and CONNECT handshakes
> >>
> >> That's the most up-to-date version.
> >>
> >> Adam
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Brian <theturtle32@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Adam, since it's been a while and I've lost the link to the new
> >>> handshake proposal, can you verify for me (and others) that this is
> >>> the most up-to-date version that I should be reading?
> >>>
> >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-abarth-websocket-handshake-01
> >
> > I noticed that version uses XOR for masking, while your paper mentioned
> using AES.  Are you planning to update this proposal to use AES as well?
>  (Also, now that I've read the thing, here's another vote for rewriting it
> in declarative style.)
>
> The syntax can perhaps be described declaratively, but some parts will
> likely have to remain algorithmic. There are specific computations to be
> done with the fields and particular must-reject conditions which are
> essential to the security of the handshake. Computing the values of certain
> fields in the syntax also needs to be done in a particular way, for instance
> the fact that the client-nonce is to be chosen uniformly at random each time
> is important, and not really captured by ABNF.
>
> Regards,
> Maciej
>
>
Maciej, I agree with you that some parts will have to remain algorithmic,
e.g. some of the rejection conditions and calculations. I'm hoping we can
find a happy medium somewhere, and I will not take it at all personally if
people have suggested changes once we have a draft to change (assuming we
can declare consensus that this is the handshake we want to move forward
with, which I hope we can.)


> _______________________________________________
> hybi mailing list
> hybi@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email