Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Spin per peer (#1982)

[ekr <[e-mail]>]

ekr commented on this pull request.



> -
-When the spin bit is disabled, endpoints SHOULD set the spin bit value to zero,
-regardless of the values received from their peer. Addendums or revisions to
+fraction of connections.
+
+The selection process SHOULD be designed such that
+on average the spin bit is disabled for at least one eighth of network paths.
+The random choice SHOULD be dependent
+on the source and destination addresses of the path,
+so that the spin bit is consistently enabled or
+disabled for repeated use of the same path.
+
+When the spin bit is disabled, endpoints SHOULD set the spin bit value to
+a constant value randomly chosen to be 0 or 1,
+regardless of the values received from their peer.  Alternatively, endpoints MAY
+change this value when changing connection ID.  Addendums or revisions to

> I don't like unspecified. Why not just set it to zero and apply the header protection mask bit that is otherwise not applied. This means AEAD sees it as 0, and middleboxes sees it as random.

Assuming I understand this proposal, that means the peer would need to know if you were spinning or not, which is an anti-goal.

> Setting it to anything else is not going to fool endpoints wrt. deactivated spinning. Using header protection mask also avoids PRNG issues in packet construction. Having to store extra PRNG state is just a burden and grows state.

Not by any significant amount compared to the existing buffers you need to store





-- 
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/1982#discussion_r236251772