IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] What to do if address of client changes while in draining state (#946)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Mon, 20 November 2017 13:27 UTC

Return-Path: <bounces+848413-a050-quic-issues=ietf.org@sgmail.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 8D003127868 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 05:27:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.018
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.018 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 fnbHb7Sx4UbS for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 05:27:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from o9.sgmail.github.com (o9.sgmail.github.com [167.89.101.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23D51126E01 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 05:27:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; h=from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=QKU/61HvL/FRIJpgZgzSYCnO8I8=; b=sWhEXCYiBmvP0bpK MRv8fdWJV0NrSVeDCXdzyyzCBg4S4HiiH9LXATgiQ2rtX1683vLqlVjD97S0ABBW 7yHds+Jejknl+8YDUIRfwKi5plTNUUDgfGNnLNcBtrjWaNbfNIjuJV/QH4+5CLrt WPE6TRvrjT0d0/bzJOVk9xwP/xA=
Received: by filter0496p1mdw1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter0496p1mdw1-17841-5A12D849-16 2017-11-20 13:27:37.715937025 +0000 UTC
Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net [192.30.253.16]) by ismtpd0010p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id e7ThaZ8sT4GRdolz1AulFg for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 13:27:37.716 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 13:27:37 +0000
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab9ab5459e9e4d6a5d0b11d0f9e5adad06fc01943f92cf00000001162a9a4992a169ce10662b3b@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/946/345694976@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/946@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/946@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] What to do if address of client changes while in draining state (#946)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5a12d849931b0_668d3fab18344f3812267ef"; 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
tracking:
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak22ZsKATD5G+DEv51Zg+enkDgVGFUonqOLrPa TUHWsYb70WAs2q9xG3EuOdY1D+lpSForvISm+gNHeKwyzr/+gV0KotR1RB9au4kV9nMBrmfpmPOacF MqSH1ocWtNzFvT9R2d1gxl+oX4yFvCxsDHqbvbvJgfhC2u627WBxmfGNTzBvJhcc22o5bbzFS2HwCX 0=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/K28EWqCB2XN0KqF4-17upiJr510>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 20 Nov 2017 13:27:41 -0000

If you send a connection close, I believe there's a recommendation to use exponential backoff, and the sender decides how large the packet is, so amplification factor shouldn't be a concern.

I'm confused by "if you can't verify the packet correctly, then it would make sense to ignore it because we don't want to verify and let the peer go into idle_timeout".  Avoiding idle timeout involves sending something, either a connection close or public reset.

Honestly, I think the best approach is to do what implementations will likely do by default, which is to send a connection close if you're still storing it and then transition to sending public reset when you've decided to discard the old connection close.

-- 
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/946#issuecomment-345694976

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email