IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO timer should be set on Handshake Complete (#3613)

martinduke <notifications@github.com> Thu, 30 April 2020 01:41 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 F038A3A0CED for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 18:41:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.819
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.819 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, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.82, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR=0.01] 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 r4hL3UzG1NeD for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 18:41:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-28.smtp.github.com (out-28.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.211]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 59E063A0CE1 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 18:41:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-52827f8.ash1-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-52827f8.ash1-iad.github.net [10.56.108.24]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A9668C1192 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 18:41:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1588210882; bh=dJbmR/655FRhG/YZfWvxAeO5BRBUu+GRDGRsQuhWP/c=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=bYC/6dzkEdPXdd/4dC0NbNaxWH2byu/vPapmyinn6GAVdHWT9+y8yjhSk3SAkrkYE KAFIsRu6LWv1VhzDCZ1dxVtZVcfIExMJA2I7myyGDoFnpG7BlLTruRk3nzZ63N7s2K +khiT5IsE/RrK0lC1OSGTZTtVctcuyenctPEhnbE=
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 18:41:22 -0700
From: martinduke <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK2WDULD3454SOV44I54WYG4FEVBNHHCIVAFGY@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3613/621561629@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3613@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3613@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO timer should be set on Handshake Complete (#3613)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5eaa2cc28b331_23643fb1b2ccd960145322"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: martinduke
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/QlCqce0G1sgVVQweK_E5BeCoVNI>
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, 30 Apr 2020 01:41:33 -0000

I changed the title, since it's wrong.

There might be some useful editorial cleanup here, but the substantive change would be to reset PTO when the handshake is complete, rather than confirmed. The edge case is that the client lost its 0RTT flight and HANDSHAKE_DONE is held up by losses or something. The delay in sending the client's HTTP request could turn out to be quite long.

-- 
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/3613#issuecomment-621561629

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email