IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Flow/congestion control and rejected 0-RTT (#390)

Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com> Fri, 17 March 2017 03:01 UTC

Return-Path: <bounces+848413-a050-quic-issues=ietf.org@sgmail.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 732CB129BBE for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 20:01:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.392
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.392 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_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.796, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 nS8Rok-RL_Xk for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 20:01:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from o3.sgmail.github.com (o3.sgmail.github.com [192.254.112.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A3B83129BC8 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 20:01:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; h=from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=a5euke/oxmzYKDdsVR7NqAdxhJY=; b=EENO/BGRiPemG0/S eGu+RtjW24tUDAx+wfRhqhI2P24N43LlD3s3MpknvwMdTnQq2cu4zDbO48uGlOgS PCBT3TQTzTQ0S86ujP+lbty5JhDCG33VAkI40siq8LMIpdbznnLx6Y7a4aZBWj36 HSqNleoPgdZ4dNHURN0ECS1es8c=
Received: by filter0949p1mdw1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter0949p1mdw1-7744-58CB5199-5C 2017-03-17 03:01:45.536243926 +0000 UTC
Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net [192.30.253.17]) by ismtpd0006p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id Rj4EHyRtSo2p_8C6fkCn2A for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 03:01:45.456 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 20:01:45 -0700
From: Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab724aa61d493a9bf3b2cadcb31da553523e2304af92cf0000000114e3139992a169ce0cbc0439@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/390/287254182@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/390@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/390@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Flow/congestion control and rejected 0-RTT (#390)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_58cb51994ecf6_1cc83fcf00e9dc341943e2"; 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
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak1hnmFIbJzQOx7s+/31KJfrxyARhnFsJzXBge yrm1SPhfO3AZ9UL6v41gtI26YUTOylyTSMIdLUJ3UsyRD9w/vxmUq3VOm4s+dfiTEzhWVzJtTippqZ +2C+xBJersrIEkVQM1JaI8AGMNrrD9vp3ggdiyE2PhDEU9gVPl6X86vJAwIyQZgD37j+iQbLv22yUn U=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/DSs6Kf57QF4f0P6l6GDlgXiITY4>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 17 Mar 2017 03:01:48 -0000

My hypothesis (caveat with the same distrust of intuition you have) is that if you let a client use the default OR remembered value for connection flow control, then you will have to reject more often.  That is, when remembered < default, a server can't know whether the client bothered to remember and so will have to assume the worst.

Creating clear signaling for this might not be feasible.  "I don't have enough memory for your 0-RTT data" is another way of saying "please DoS me more" to some people.

-- 
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/390#issuecomment-287254182

v2.30.2 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status