Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Client MUST use 1-RTT packets if it reads 1-RTT packets (#2458)

ianswett <> Fri, 15 February 2019 00:11 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4390E12F1A6 for <>; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 16:11:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.597
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.597 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_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 eMUPYHodUbAH for <>; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 16:11:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CEC8128B36 for <>; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 16:11:48 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 16:11:47 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1550189507; bh=ti1YBtvXicAVrtl0t726brOKjN3YBZRwcD0yZDEJcOU=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=ONXn4/wMWvtZh5unt8VXdlkRYb3sJdCgSi4Br/qU6oaZpqqnzjfVAZMDthDohQ5W1 V2IaivnOmzwfH63oKubEwVr+A63FLrjY9ijZ1ylqmYGsxRN7Ij1i23ysdmoNMiDwwV mo0w6CNzEhZ9OtZ1X4Fof+I5QHeFxbOtI7zLiv1U=
From: ianswett <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2458/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Client MUST use 1-RTT packets if it reads 1-RTT packets (#2458)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c6603c372a0d_29693fa0e52d45b8365a5"; 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: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 00:11:50 -0000

I think this should be stated in transport as well as TLS, along with a statement that a server MAY/SHOULD/MUST ignore 0RTT packets that have higher packet numbers than the first received 1RTT packet.  The first is editorial I believe, the latter is borderline design.

If we decided it was valid to close the connection if a 0RTT packet was received with a higher packet number than 1RTT, then that's definitely not editorial, but I think it may be a good way to enforce proper behavior.

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