Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Allow CONNECTION_CLOSE in 0-RTT (#3435)

ianswett <> Thu, 06 February 2020 10:54 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 073101202DD for <>; Thu, 6 Feb 2020 02:54:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.381
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.381 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_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 HG-frohvqoMX for <>; Thu, 6 Feb 2020 02:54:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63E62120271 for <>; Thu, 6 Feb 2020 02:54:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0711A0081 for <>; Thu, 6 Feb 2020 02:54:08 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1580986448; bh=VGvzEGgyha2P/uJ5lOlPP6UaEPexG0z8mQMkdObIZSw=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=EXRzAZl0a2LrWUqpHYcH/Z4DTYycGJk66NuhGY1QUGUNZHNlF4CteP48nJQIMTFb6 p5Ye28SrXF/ZZ6n1SgpSNBsGrepPV0ledTJ3LUEUYoM37Ik1HMuG2LJfNFU3CD5/gN Z3QyglXD35nDLgY+zQ03dzQRetrwEGReCKVOm+rk=
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2020 02:54:08 -0800
From: ianswett <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3435/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Allow CONNECTION_CLOSE in 0-RTT (#3435)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e3bf050b0760_59313fd20b0cd95c18326a"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ianswett
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: Thu, 06 Feb 2020 10:54:11 -0000

There's already text about sending connection close in the highest encryption level the sender knows the peer can process.  When 0-RTT is sent, the client doesn't know whether the server can process the packets.

See text starting with
 "When sending CONNECTION_CLOSE, the goal is to ensure that the peer
   will process the frame.  Generally, this means sending the frame in a
   packet with the highest level of packet protection to avoid the
   packet being discarded."

I think the existing text advises clients not do this, but making it illegal is silly.

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