Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] use a HANDSHAKE_DONE frame to drive the handshake to confirmation (#3145)

Mike Bishop <notifications@github.com> Fri, 27 December 2019 16:13 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 C51A8120019 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Dec 2019 08:13:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8 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, 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 oi8rtMNNdjP1 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Dec 2019 08:13:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-1.smtp.github.com (out-1.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.192]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78D9D12006F for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Dec 2019 08:13:29 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2019 08:13:28 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1577463208; bh=7shLDaNtCUAkXhG5WJmwxTMDGDgVxdrhC2de11uQr3A=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=E6QB+saqSfqvzuBUGjV5KKd7iPQzW5wkWJjGN7KKz3ggIXm5aVylGL9GtBbRUa5rJ Coi+Xbc+gbxzrdAoNXsKarAW7ETg1h5lwdBIXrBIEl/Sy81C5MZ02LECOq0IH8dcFn +P2JPgrxrH5EwEABiftfzaVfdGLR4E6u2L+Oc5cU=
From: Mike Bishop <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK533W7PFNRWGX6O4YF4CNQCREVBNHHB475TUU@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3145/review/336810574@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3145@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3145@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] use a HANDSHAKE_DONE frame to drive the handshake to confirmation (#3145)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e062da89f670_53493fc4356cd96c10401c8"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: MikeBishop
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/4dsnbuGFoxJzXItV9LBsdg_cMMA>
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: Fri, 27 Dec 2019 16:13:32 -0000

MikeBishop approved this pull request.

Re-reviewing, since there have been a lot of commits since I reviewed before.  Still looks good.

> @@ -390,13 +390,15 @@ perspective of the endpoint in question.
 
 ### Handshake Confirmed {#handshake-confirmed}
 
-In this document, the TLS handshake is considered confirmed at an endpoint when
-the following two conditions are met: the handshake is complete, and the
-endpoint has received an acknowledgment for a packet sent with 1-RTT keys.
-This second condition can be implemented by recording the lowest packet number
-sent with 1-RTT keys, and the highest value of the Largest Acknowledged field
-in any received 1-RTT ACK frame: once the latter is higher than or equal to the
-former, the handshake is confirmed.
+In this document, the TLS handshake is considered confirmed at the server when
+the handshake completes.  At the client, the handshake is considered confirmed
+when a HANDSHAKE_DONE frame is received.
+
+A client MAY consider the handshake to be confirmed when it receives an
+acknowledgement for a 1-RTT packet.  This can be implemented by recording the
+lowest packet number sent with 1-RTT keys, and comparing it to the Largest
+Acknowledged field in any received 1-RTT ACK frame: once the latter is higher

```suggestion
Acknowledged field in any received 1-RTT ACK frame: once the latter is greater
```

> -In this document, the TLS handshake is considered confirmed at an endpoint when
-the following two conditions are met: the handshake is complete, and the
-endpoint has received an acknowledgment for a packet sent with 1-RTT keys.
-This second condition can be implemented by recording the lowest packet number
-sent with 1-RTT keys, and the highest value of the Largest Acknowledged field
-in any received 1-RTT ACK frame: once the latter is higher than or equal to the
-former, the handshake is confirmed.
+In this document, the TLS handshake is considered confirmed at the server when
+the handshake completes.  At the client, the handshake is considered confirmed
+when a HANDSHAKE_DONE frame is received.
+
+A client MAY consider the handshake to be confirmed when it receives an
+acknowledgement for a 1-RTT packet.  This can be implemented by recording the
+lowest packet number sent with 1-RTT keys, and comparing it to the Largest
+Acknowledged field in any received 1-RTT ACK frame: once the latter is higher
+than or equal to the former, the handshake can be confirmed.

```suggestion
than or equal to the former, the handshake is confirmed.
```
I see the discussion below; I think it's better as "is," since you're describing how it would be implemented.  However, that's certainly not a hard blocker.

> @@ -5495,6 +5497,16 @@ Reason Phrase:
   This SHOULD be a UTF-8 encoded string {{!RFC3629}}.
 
 
+## HANDSHAKE_DONE frame {#handshake-done-frame}
+
+The server uses the HANDSHAKE_DONE frame (type=0x1e) to signal confirmation of
+the handshake to the client.  The HANDSHAKE_DONE frame contains no additional
+fields.
+
+This frame can only be sent by the server. A server MUST treat receipt of a
+HANDSHAKE_DONE frame as a connection error of type PROTOCOL_VIOLATION.
+
+

Marking this branch resolved because this text has been added.

-- 
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/3145#pullrequestreview-336810574