IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] [Version Ossification] Alternative version and Initial Salt should be part of NEW_TOKEN (#3111)

Mike Bishop <notifications@github.com> Mon, 28 October 2019 20:59 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 4B6FC120091 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 13:59:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.382
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.382 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] 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 YW5YulR95GSU for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 13:59:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-14.smtp.github.com (out-14.smtp.github.com [192.30.254.197]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8732A120024 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 13:59:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-fb56993.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-fb56993.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.19.31]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28E491210A2 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 13:59:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1572296370; bh=eZ+s1QL2CU6kD8kXRV6J+xxar6MihIL0yxDmlmB0f00=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=Q7yU2tKjTO+0o+EiXKOwdTl3L463w7bqJdGo15mnCbUq0BWi+px1wrz29vKTowMlI NaRR565+UX5hTQKGFzK6ono2UDE804mJFmcEp9FFXfWZW8+83gH66lXbg5Yj7HSkWv X4MVye8IQ/roHMqZ5hs6lcHcmjgsllVTfe+RveWs=
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 13:59:29 -0700
From: Mike Bishop <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK7QGUYGLNUROOKZTPV3YSLUDEVBNHHB4UHVOQ@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3111/547143353@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3111@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3111@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] [Version Ossification] Alternative version and Initial Salt should be part of NEW_TOKEN (#3111)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5db756b1d8a83_6f2a3f9f390cd95c4363d7"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: MikeBishop
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/FYZSGkXfPNSCXOipWXjyXJvTaT8>
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: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 20:59:32 -0000

The ability to cryptographically secure Initials is extremely compelling.  The base version is tricky -- the obvious answer is that it's the version you're speaking now, but that might complicate our upgrade story.  We're getting to the point where we need a sane outline of the answer to "How does a client discover that it and the server both speak a higher/better version of QUIC than the one currently being used?" even if we leave the details for later.

-- 
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/3111#issuecomment-547143353

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email