IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Mixing connection IDs is OK (#3870)

Mike Bishop <notifications@github.com> Thu, 09 July 2020 19:23 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 63E383A0E3B for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 12:23:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.555
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.555 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, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, 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 Y1iz1HfMSVh3 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 12:23:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-24.smtp.github.com (out-24.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.207]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 182873A0E39 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 12:23:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-0eea13f.ash1-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-0eea13f.ash1-iad.github.net [10.56.109.26]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 466F46A0E5F for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 12:23:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1594322610; bh=odCBOOMxbDR8Xiza8cghpzXzW8kv3KoI/I7QcLBC190=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=cpgCkgQsAEpsx1cit4wMJT13Bc80eW+jHECHf9ltEACYk/oNtXsAjFxGjxSlMfrMr lCQExfQHyn+X/Ft2B53vIAx4yPdGqmTZwl2EQLjHxDV1q/zWQLlG2uk0NRo/mRkwod Yn4kTXP7+e5PPajqd7eUrZOrivaMHefrr/jYMwV4=
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2020 12:23:30 -0700
From: Mike Bishop <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK5LTNCI6Q6GUSOEVN55CNH3FEVBNHHCN3DNBM@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3870/review/445903526@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3870@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3870@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Mixing connection IDs is OK (#3870)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5f076eb2365d2_38d3fe798acd964182888"; 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/G1ptUStKTwURg8lawNBt8P0Hrvg>
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: Thu, 09 Jul 2020 19:23:32 -0000

@MikeBishop approved this pull request.

I don't see that forcing verification buys us anything.  Given that intermediaries can freely remix the packet/datagram boundaries, the only thing we could do for a violation is ignore the packet.  If you don't ignore the packet, then it will just get rejected as invalid anyway.

The failure mode might be having valid packets for two different connections in the same datagram, and the server processes both for their respective connections.  If they're two valid packets, that's... potentially not harmful, I suppose?



-- 
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/3870#pullrequestreview-445903526

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email