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

Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com> Tue, 22 October 2019 02:27 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 02B82120AEA for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:27:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.596
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.596 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_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 sjSbsG7xI5N7 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:27:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-17.smtp.github.com (out-17.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06791120AEB for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:27:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-d93c4b6.va3-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-d93c4b6.va3-iad.github.net [10.48.17.47]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53F666E11BE for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:27:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1571711221; bh=mkOiBGxp4gt4dDQZ4qxyotSVFWVJ8VU8OuQQNfRgwlQ=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=1cMqlMgqg124UjK4GrvFUX4CdGSUAcgeerXqdLovnWEiT2hoqqrkUDXMpeapBb1mg p1fBp3Lon9WCMOTJM6ykiGuDbZDFQVwWo8rC/Mgn+gDsFN7RPXhp0tHYJv7LJyOBlj 1Dsocr18gPAjQH3VleJRRwNJRSuIymcgi0bzAp4Q=
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:27:01 -0700
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK3QBVUCTRIAN2R6RHV3XONXLEVBNHHB4ST4NM@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3107/review/304940270@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3107@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3107@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Immediately close with INVALID_TOKEN (#3107)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5dae68f54596c_706e3fe1874cd968776b9"; 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
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/BGafPLkN8wUIiDT1Q4KCGUQt628>
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: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 02:27:09 -0000

kazuho commented on this pull request.



> @@ -1641,6 +1641,14 @@ 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 with a unverifiable 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

If we are to make this a mandatory requirement, under the assumption that the servers would act like that, should we also suggest that a server should issue tokens in a way that a Retry token and a NEW_TOKEN token are distinguishable from each other?

Unless we recommend servers building a token in that way, I do not think making this a MUST has benefits.

-- 
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/3107#discussion_r337311953