Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Padding overhead in DNS over QUIC scenarios (#3523)

Kazuho Oku <> Sat, 14 March 2020 08:44 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B97DA3A099F for <>; Sat, 14 Mar 2020 01:44:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.554
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.554 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_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lvVrig61mYpn for <>; Sat, 14 Mar 2020 01:44:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 622EE3A0996 for <>; Sat, 14 Mar 2020 01:44:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40D04660085 for <>; Sat, 14 Mar 2020 01:44:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1584175465; bh=5w7FB11w7881ohbWjgctIggFlDWYkCeNQgeBJZeiXG4=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=ejvyE0rxK+QQ5hqmR8jig+OKZjCfTh59RRxLY9LbPRUBzdJ8vOzZwaMBFv41gFqyE oqhIue+tke3AK9GmLSdlJnJ5Gc97RnFLH/n/I8E2Vz9NRAc8t4CcZxoWpE6Ccw8S9U XlLVB44RdHHHifF6Pea24FJGUhsLudHf4f+2GPjY=
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2020 01:44:25 -0700
From: Kazuho Oku <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3523/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Padding overhead in DNS over QUIC scenarios (#3523)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e6c996930929_38a93fb3d04cd95c2875f2"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: kazuho
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2020 08:44:33 -0000

Regarding solution, I think it might be a good idea to have a way of reducing the size of first client-sent Initial to 400 bytes, possibly by letting the server advertise that using a TP.

The reason for choosing 400 bytes is that 3x of 400 is 1200 bytes - this gives the server enough room for sending a Retry packet, or a datagram consisting of Initial and Handshake packet. When the server decides to do a full handshake, waiting for the response to either of the two would allow the server to validate the connection.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: