Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Handling of corrupt Retry packets (#3014)

ianswett <> Thu, 26 September 2019 21:13 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44880120178 for <>; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:13:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.382
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.382 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_24=1.618, 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: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dsPBqgVwgYRA for <>; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:13:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF7F91200CD for <>; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:13:41 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:13:41 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1569532421; bh=F6fPsT8zw/nY4551h5lQDylGcpkzdgVozM/EX7c5V0Q=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=W6BPNlzk76kUviZFIDA2X1n4KMEh4hG+AIjLBzS/lxSYE6fm/ospLukW9p62SKHG/ CYSpORmKI6x+Qe/PASvcijt2YM44aeuuvmkpT+MTaNVvmgf8Mkih6zVj8SY46eaPZQ WG3bl87iLTszeLRcm4UwPpixMMtAOewrOgZmRSV0=
From: ianswett <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3014/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Handling of corrupt Retry packets (#3014)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d8d2a05134d5_76ad3fc3b2ecd96077136a"; 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: Thu, 26 Sep 2019 21:13:43 -0000

@nibanks Those numbers are very different from the ones I've seen.  In particular, I've never seen UDP send lower than encrypt that I can recall.

I will note that I'm typically looking at profiles of a full process(ie: a load balancer/cache/etc), not just the QUIC stack, but even so your crypto is much more expensive than I'd expect.

Are you using AES-NI and/or AVX instructions?

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