Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] If you want a Stateless Reset you need to send a much larger packet than before (#2770)

David Schinazi <> Tue, 11 June 2019 23:10 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6DFA1201CA for <>; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 16:10:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.878
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.878 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.415, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] 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 QW_F1krR6p1j for <>; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 16:10:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B4A0120139 for <>; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 16:10:05 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 16:10:04 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1560294604; bh=tKk4L7rKvx9jt1HYk+PZGvuGWfrUkkudqiKjPzOYVhc=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=ugtmw4pABy4s6Punujf0dzBtsNSb28ywnnsItrmHSSmAwg2tzHJouiDbpuRRDgpH2 Rea52ijt+fN26TYr94V6z5Fgs+7VsLJ+HnAyDipInNNaFe3i82PiKFFw7bVAGkDOvO rtRsDj38YSQMfcZqkF/j+jYz8ChvVnu9n0RtQzgE=
From: David Schinazi <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2770/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] If you want a Stateless Reset you need to send a much larger packet than before (#2770)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d0034cc83e5a_71203fe5718cd96c11689a"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: DavidSchinazi
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, 11 Jun 2019 23:10:14 -0000

At the end of the day, I think the tradeoff is between the stateless reset sticking out and wasting padding bytes. Adding some text saying that endpoints that use longer connection IDs than their peers should pad their very short packets if they care about stateless resets not sticking out is the least awkward solution here? I don't think this is a really bad issue in practice.

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