Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Immediately close with INVALID_TOKEN (#3107)

Kazuho Oku <> Fri, 01 November 2019 23:42 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B3EE1200E6 for <>; Fri, 1 Nov 2019 16:42:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.999 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_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] 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 eMFCDoM9d8Xy for <>; Fri, 1 Nov 2019 16:42:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C714112007C for <>; Fri, 1 Nov 2019 16:42:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BCE1C60691 for <>; Fri, 1 Nov 2019 16:42:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1572651755; bh=vKEmKmn1rpZVhIYJyp/lDd5KAJu4GlK+71iDZ95q3GY=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=G+rEc0LnDllmjlyv2rldZNAeNqbZ327+MH/RqWWISAXY+hQg2OQfgRSAxPRNCFdIR m8W9BL2jXVzthGMWIPIOVR7ndmNzXSXkJ7G4+cB0gtLwziZBsa7Ik0SG/2ZHbNeRSn QIoMtSS6EE+IJ8SuseitijwuXwwS/w++63LdDNk8=
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2019 16:42:35 -0700
From: Kazuho Oku <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3107/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Immediately close with INVALID_TOKEN (#3107)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5dbcc2eb1d626_65b3f97b8ccd96082220"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: kazuho
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, 01 Nov 2019 23:42:41 -0000

kazuho commented on this pull request.

> @@ -1641,6 +1641,13 @@ of connection establishment.  By giving the client a different connection ID to
 use, a server can cause the connection to be routed to a server instance with
 more resources available for new connections.
+If a server receives a client Initial that can be unprotected but contains an
+invalid Retry token, it knows the client will not accept another Retry token.
+It can either proceed with the handshake without verifying the token or
+immediately close ({{immediate-close}}) the connection with a connection
+error of INVALID_TOKEN to cause the handshake to fail quickly instead of
+waiting for the client to timeout.

I agree that listing all the three options would be an improvement.

At the same time, I have a concern regarding the suggestion of doing either an immediate close or proceeding the handshake. Those two options both require the server to retain state that cannot be delayed by providing a Retry to token to the client.

I think it we might want to downgrade the SHOULD to MAY, or, suggest that a server can send a CONNECTION_CLOSE frame (with INVALID_TOKEN) without retaining state.

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