IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Strengthen 2119 language around tokens. (#2124)

MikkelFJ <notifications@github.com> Wed, 12 December 2018 14:51 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 ADFDA129533 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 06:51:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.056
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.056 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1.46, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 Wc27_qR9AfMs for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 06:51:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-3.smtp.github.com (out-3.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11564127B92 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 06:51:25 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 06:51:24 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1544626284; bh=7HdohZPvFtleBzyCQd1OKpv5l8UCDqLcvC6H9meS+jA=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=PxFMHw0yWKuRYWsWzFa10Gn9TC/4L+taw9vQIN+jOEtUH881zvVi3xvTuAbLMl/t8 opf/p3C+Zm6e+mIMw/NU7G/oUoxox/eCjs0goargvbnCQQ0fSTDFxPgwvC2v+Z9q9p CS7/P1PipG39S/L/iah6lR+dnld9calvNAQa7fAA=
From: MikkelFJ <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abdf67f70239e4e0c6c66b265b37f76c9d297e474392cf000000011828e26c92a169ce1742d764@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2124/review/184215675@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2124@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2124@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Strengthen 2119 language around tokens. (#2124)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c11206c135bd_37853f8d8fed45c094828"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: mikkelfj
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/Jj9Orrd9zFcHV-QXJWiUlax-Nrk>
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: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 14:51:27 -0000

mikkelfj commented on this pull request.



> @@ -1627,7 +1627,7 @@ interface.  A client needs to start the connection process over if it migrates
 prior to completing the handshake.
 
 When a server receives an Initial packet with an address validation token, it
-SHOULD attempt to validate it, unless it has already completed address
+MUST attempt to validate it, unless it has already completed address

MUST implies that it must fail if it cannot validate. During server cluster upgrades that might not be feasible. It could lead to consistent connection failures as long at the client has a token to try. It is in the servers interest to generally attempt validation so SHOULD seems reasonable to me.

-- 
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/2124#pullrequestreview-184215675

v2.12.3 | Report a Bug | By Email