IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Padding outside QUIC packet (#3333)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Mon, 13 January 2020 14:29 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 270D212004A for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 06:29:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.999 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_32=0.001, 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 9rbvj9NkSqUH for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 06:29:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-17.smtp.github.com (out-17.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54BF812003E for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 06:29:39 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 06:29:38 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1578925778; bh=L51LVp7A0d2bf4wDilzu8ej0kG/KDMy5L+y1dl9JfKs=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=ls0KDKbSMZK2nssoz5/5qXgMwJgKUDVMWlavnanKLYA4fI0Qpd/z0S17h8zyEqntd uBfZ8np/0u3KU9HnvvOuME+fEtt6C4sEyVuOz1737j6dTa6FlPHdnCew7ORW0p5AT2 yY3WZAmmae+chTVreYvkD17XV9IIvQjDp0gFvx5I=
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK6GX3G5ZBTULYFPDTV4FGYVFEVBNHHCBMO65M@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3333/573689645@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3333@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3333@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Padding outside QUIC packet (#3333)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e1c7ed25e2e3_2e9d3fb39c2cd96012557"; 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/KdIDNPGfJMR-UA-BMnhZyCpPW1c>
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, 13 Jan 2020 14:29:41 -0000

As @ekr pointed out, this type of padding doesn't allow coalescing 0-RTT with the client hello or 0.5RTT server data with the server's first flight, so it limits coalescing in common use cases, though I agree may be easier to implement.

To me, the biggest risk here is that the non-QUIC padding is removed by something on the path.  However, that risk seems similar to the risk that something on the path would split a coalesced packet into two UDP datagrams(discussed in #3317), so it seems acceptable.

Because it prevents coalescing in some useful cases, I don't think it should be recommended, but I can't come up with a strong reason for disallowing it, so I think it should continue to be allowed.

-- 
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/3333#issuecomment-573689645

v2.30.2 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status