IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Handling of corrupt Retry packets (#3014)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Thu, 26 September 2019 21:02 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 5B97E12022A for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:02:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.281
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.281 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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
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 lpXj0Z4XVN7I for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:02:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-5.smtp.github.com (out-5.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C4B91200EB for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:02:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-f045d1f.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-f045d1f.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.19.54]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84E679607B4 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:02:33 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:02:33 -0700
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK6RVBF3M6QBTW3EKZV3TJT7TEVBNHHB2TYBKQ@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3014/535684862@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3014@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3014@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Handling of corrupt Retry packets (#3014)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d8d276975f97_42133fd79eacd9641378f4"; 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
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/HKuMt6GdbQhUwpD7cm033DaXRFY>
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, 26 Sep 2019 21:02:37 -0000

Functionally, a Retry or Initial with no payload should be identical, minus the packet format?
- Both have a Token
- Both have a way of validating the original CID
- Both have no other payload

I believe we considered using the Initial packet as a Retry packet in the Stream0 design team, but the reason we decided not to was some members thought the encryption cost was too high.  It looks like we're still in the same place in that regard?

-- 
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/3014#issuecomment-535684862

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email