Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Multiple connections on the same port (#714)

[MikkelFJ <[e-mail]>]

> One observation that such a multiplexing client would need to be especially careful with QUIC packets featuring unknown Connection IDs.

Due to packet spoofing and port guessing this is/should also be a concern with 5-tuples during initial handshake - relying on connection IDs ought to signficantly reduce this concern because it is difficult to guess off path. But I agree that this must be considered regardless.

However, is it strictly relevant to buffer unknown packets. It is much simpler to drop them when there isn't yet an established context to hook them up to and it does protect against random noise/attacks. It will only be relevant in the rearly connection setup. I'm just guessing here, but for flow control it might not be a bad thing to register a dropped packet because clearly there is some performance issue unless it is trivial reordering - and multi-channel reordering typically happens in larger bulks I believe. So, optimizing performance under adverse conditions might not be the best option. A typical attacker could force dropped packets by overflowing network and router queues and here end-point buffering would add some reselience, but then, most end-point buffering would likely be from adversary.

-- 
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/issues/714#issuecomment-321757210