IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Don't store or retransmit PATH_RESPONSE frames, avoid buffering (#2729)

David Schinazi <notifications@github.com> Wed, 29 May 2019 13:26 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 1FE3112011A for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 May 2019 06:26:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.008
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.008 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] 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 0cOKpay5Hbp1 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 May 2019 06:26:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-4.smtp.github.com (out-4.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC0871200B8 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 May 2019 06:26:54 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 29 May 2019 06:26:53 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1559136413; bh=8RMgXVW4v7aaixdtMibF+8PQw1eXrVutLo8Ra2GEZ1A=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=MIBrO3Q6Xb6XX2AR9YTxwa8Zbq+xvOV9JGj43Ic0x9jWx1P1RNnZCUVr0FyJW/AZ7 rurTqW7v3upd6+m8sduUNlKeORV/LMuVHBb0lQOFq7JpDq0w+gxXlmmBn0YNR8B4vu aPSP26UzvixWEz/D1slX3IBfJWYLBbykDOyMvkG4=
From: David Schinazi <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK6LX6PTWIOSMH4JWVF27O5R3EVBNHHBVGEZF4@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2729/c496935980@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2729@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2729@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Don't store or retransmit PATH_RESPONSE frames, avoid buffering (#2729)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5cee889d7b0bf_6a473fb2b34cd95c14047"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: DavidSchinazi
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/6LgiF4LADUR8mYZk7MbCjh55ldE>
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: Wed, 29 May 2019 13:26:56 -0000

I would personally recommend dropping the  "unless" clause and only adding the new MUST NOT statement in this PR. The attack of sending many path challenges is no worse than sending other types of frames (see discussion in #2129 and #2241). I worry that this "unless" is vague and will cause some implementations to not respond to path challenges in non-attack cases which will harm performance. One mitigation that makes more sense is to say that you MUST NOT send multiple PATH_CHALLENGE frames in a packet, and receiving multiple of them triggers a PROTOCOL_VIOLATION.

-- 
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/2729#issuecomment-496935980

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email