Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Specify behavior for post-handshake CRYPTO messages (#2524)

ianswett <> Tue, 16 April 2019 16:23 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F36F1200F4 for <>; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 09:23:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.002
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Vosx53IM0w2t for <>; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 09:23:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20B5E1203E5 for <>; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 09:11:55 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 09:11:53 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1555431113; bh=eZeaA95NITinGC5/O9Rrycz2HR3BZW64cCzfwJNEndI=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=Yz38ouToVgqkvSddecY9j9mOcQbt1gduTQuPLDkCVu6rFGkym0t29eRMI6/UPDN0+ AzgnmYFPWVH/xl4VTibMYNUyKGv9w3H7vTS0LiDsvFXyT2sCCpFNdX0tTNlbpbcrXQ 6TfHt8gHKwRk9QrxVWJgU9YU20tVd+yZd+YncfJc=
From: ianswett <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2524/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Specify behavior for post-handshake CRYPTO messages (#2524)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5cb5fec9c409c_6b403ff73c0d45bc7489f"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ianswett
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 16:23:39 -0000

ianswett commented on this pull request.

> +CRYPTO frames out of order. Endpoints MAY choose to allow more data to be
+buffered during the handshake. A larger limit during the handshake could allow
+for larger keys or credentials to be exchanged. An endpoint's buffer size does
+not need to remain constant during the life of the connection.
+Being unable to buffer CRYPTO frames during the handshake leads to a connection
+failure. If an endpoint's buffer is exceeded during the handshake, it can expand
+its buffer temporarily to complete the handshake. If an endpoint cannot expand
+its buffer, it MUST close the connection with a CRYPTO_BUFFER_EXCEEDED error
+Once the handshake completes, if an endpoint is unable to buffer all data in a
+CRYPTO frame, it MAY discard all subsequent CRYPTO frames, or it MAY close the
+connection with an CRYPTO_BUFFER_EXCEEDED error code. If an endpoint chooses to
+discard all subsequent CRYPTO frames, the packets containing these CRYPTO frames
+MUST be acknowledged.

They were received and processed at the transport layer, so this makes sense.

How about "Packets containing discarded CRYPTO frames MUST be acknowledged, because they were received and processed by the transport, even though they were discarded prior to the crypto stack processing them."

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: