Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] First byte changes (#2006)

[Igor Lubashev <[e-mail]>]

igorlord commented on this pull request.



>  
-: The fourth bit (0x10) of byte 0 is set to 1.
+: The next two bits (those with a mask of 0x18) of byte 0 are reserved.  These
+  bits are protected using header protection (see Section 5.4 of
+  {{QUIC-TLS}}).  The value included prior to protection MUST be set to 0.  An

@marten-seemann, as you said, it is impossible to prevent one party from disclosing anything about the connection to any third party. No shenanigans can make a dent in the amount or quality of info disclosed by a determined party. However, this setup can make it harder to troubleshoot network operations (if that involves unilaterally setting these bits for experimentation).

@martinthomson, yes, and the original comment was looking for a clarification of the threat that we are "protecting those bits the best way we know how".  Is it protecting the bits from an endpoint bent on disclosing some private information to a third party?  Or is it protecting from an endpoint accidentally exposing some information while trying to run an experiment (i.e. since one cannot be sure that everyone will run safe experiments, no one is allowed to run experiments unilaterally)? Or is it protecting from a middlebox ossifying some experimental usage of these bits? Or is it protecting from something else?

-- 
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/2006#discussion_r234800735