Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Usage of "epoch" term in recovery draft (example code in appendixes) (#2566)

David Schinazi <> Sun, 31 March 2019 17:59 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52A1B1201AC for <>; Sun, 31 Mar 2019 10:59:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8 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_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 bjiAM-1UTxJ3 for <>; Sun, 31 Mar 2019 10:59:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 530FE12001B for <>; Sun, 31 Mar 2019 10:59:45 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 10:59:43 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1554055183; bh=ZzwNOgn9+OItibRkWITRP1RDt8l39nIewTry6ibTdeI=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=qfxBdxWRfkWpcy+m9oEXV2ucBeyAmKqfg8csFRa5mbS8H8+axI5c9nMjoD1Cu1ZD9 X3q0DD73ZygoFsZXXNupIO6Cbh8MnF//klTOq7xfYg7NAnrvC80cl2vc0dxUjhxjcF UyEPFtoVIbbp/zlckWZSJ8MO4e6l8V745Kjob5zM=
From: David Schinazi <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2566/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Usage of "epoch" term in recovery draft (example code in appendixes) (#2566)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5ca1000fb6480_4a143fecffcd45c0199091"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: DavidSchinazi
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: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 17:59:47 -0000

If the "epoch" in question here is the one in my slides on discarding old 1-RTT keys after a key update, then I indeed meant it in the DTLS sense, and I apologize for the confusion. The TLS 1.3 spec refers to this concept as a "generation", so perhaps I should have used that instead here. But I agree with Martin that this concept might not necessarily need to be named in the spec if we can clarify the key update edge cases without it.

If the "epoch" in question is the one in recovery, then this is specific to recovery concepts that do not involve (D)TLS.

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