Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Packet protection or not? (#3887)
Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com> Fri, 10 July 2020 00:23 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 4FE3C3A0A47 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 17:23:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.009
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.009 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, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, 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 aVmTs3U_5hF5 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 17:23:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-23.smtp.github.com (out-23.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.206]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D65393A0A16 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 17:23:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-f144ac1.va3-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-f144ac1.va3-iad.github.net [10.48.16.59]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29CC3661EAF for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 17:23:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1594340634; bh=EWQ+UHUcxVG4SHxoY5x4EzuHXeXSJKRDYLg7bs/0l38=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=0MQroXN8tZ8PF0yrKnWXNlA+Rr7Wd5tNmQqIOYvckKaU+awrqoL1F+HghvSkQx87i fo6avXTykCPeg1uf5PbkSjUWJF31svESN/JcsThcsAhBxs3kwU5U1R09QAX83NEqCu w8NIGI3Q4KQevijC3Dnv0lZ8XKlrGhnX3MOxZLxo=
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2020 17:23:54 -0700
From: Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK6VLPHXUREL3VK465F5COLBVEVBNHHCN7H3EU@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3887/656414667@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3887@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3887@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Packet protection or not? (#3887)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5f07b51a1863b_1ecb3f8073ccd96c19142c"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: martinthomson
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/AaZqL5XL7jZgCyRxFasHDR4QVmw>
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, 10 Jul 2020 00:23:56 -0000
ekr suggested that we limit the use of "integrity protection" (and I presume "confidentiality protection") to those cases where the protection is real, and not based on fixed keys or trivially-acquired keys. I think that might be the best answer here, even if that takes more effort to get right. -- 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/3887#issuecomment-656414667
- [quicwg/base-drafts] Packet protection or not? (#… Mike Bishop
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Packet protection or not… Martin Thomson
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Packet protection or not… Jana Iyengar
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Packet protection or not… Martin Thomson