Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify client anti-amplification response (#3445)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Sat, 15 February 2020 17:45 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@github.com>
X-Original-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E11812008A for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 09:45:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.999 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_IMAGE_ONLY_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=github.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 OChwZLir54UA for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 09:45:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-7.smtp.github.com (out-7.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6FF5120041 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 09:45:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from github-lowworker-e8b54ca.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-e8b54ca.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.23.39]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C02512C0057 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 09:45:06 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1581788706; bh=UZIZvl7tn/XQYwvjglp1RuIhsbVwKjy6L5UWkADGpqo=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=AFLXW6Mltwz7VNKRXMw6CEFM9lir6zRBB0Cj7iVxigV6OggE3HYOUvl8ULUhMjabR FDDFU3aHqy2uLwNAl2lZTyfsnOtQu0yl+qK6voWYx50LZowoUmcJ6UE0Acrh6Vz4+F d9Sl3flriHcKIJMHl7zDdUlKyOLUCUUez61dDmGs=
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2020 09:45:06 -0800
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK2IGYXFJMKQWJF3IAV4KVQKFEVBNHHCDAXLQI@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3445/review/359357183@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3445@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3445@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify client anti-amplification response (#3445)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e482e22aff20_7d8d3fe49d4cd96841203d"; 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
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/1AbGTKC1q9wYQL0bdExeE3hrEI8>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <quic-issues.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic-issues/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic-issues@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2020 17:45:09 -0000

ianswett commented on this pull request.



> @@ -1626,13 +1626,16 @@ payloads of at least 1200 bytes, adding padding to packets in the datagram as
 necessary. Sending padded datagrams ensures that the server is not overly
 constrained by the amplification restriction.
 
-Packet loss, in particular loss of a Handshake packet from the server, can cause
-a situation in which the server cannot send when the client has no data to send
-and the anti-amplification limit is reached. In order to avoid this causing a
-handshake deadlock, clients MUST send a packet upon a probe timeout, as
-described in {{QUIC-RECOVERY}}. If the client has no data to retransmit and does
-not have Handshake keys, it MUST send an Initial packet in a UDP datagram of
-at least 1200 bytes.  If the client has Handshake keys, it SHOULD send a
+Loss of an Initial or Handshake packet from the server can cause a deadlock if
+the client does not send additional Initial or Handshake packets. The server can
+reach its anti-amplification limit, but the clients Initial data has been

Thanks for the suggestion, I took it and then tweaked it.  PTAL.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3445#discussion_r379845294