Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Go Back to Single Packet Number Space (#1579)
Nick Banks <notifications@github.com> Tue, 17 July 2018 20:49 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 7328C13106D for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 13:49:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.01
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-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 3ou7sIDadjlS for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 13:49:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-9.smtp.github.com (out-9.smtp.github.com [192.30.254.192]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3F97130FD9 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 13:49:43 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 13:49:43 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1531860583; bh=NufVXHp9u4eWqT8K7krOcGkfm9+lIJV8JWOUlSZrMLA=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=ptuN7PxzGkqVEUlMci92DlAlvmViSRMzDY/9ubLYsxkt+es9q+VrS/2nYDl10C+Y5 JXOwIR4vZWyjuKgpDkyHSBrf3D9Rxba7HNFJ3yEzYzDhVcAUf35fAYhak4/4IL7Ig6 M5DUwM1AxtF7qd439EJF8zTiKEuCJsnc5iCbeP7A=
From: Nick Banks <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab6e5daac510d7c4465070147f0436a6a95ca5210b92cf000000011766186792a169ce14638397@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1579/405722963@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1579@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1579@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Go Back to Single Packet Number Space (#1579)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5b4e56672bfbe_4ec32ab119b52f583632b4"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: nibanks
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/UAn3dJEgHiZ58zHek5jxRfDftGQ>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 20:49:54 -0000
@ekr I have heard you voice this experience before. Why do you feel acknowledging a packet in the same or higher level encryption level is harder? The simplest way I see to implement it is the following: Along with the set of packet numbers to acknowledge, keep track of the highest encryption level you have received. Then, only send ACK frames in that encryption level or higher. On the receive side, to validate it, you have to keep a few bits to track which encryption level a packet was received. When that packet gets acknowledged, just validate the level. @ianswett for #1018 does requiring ACK frames to be sent in Handshake encryption level or higher solve the problem? -- 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/1579#issuecomment-405722963
- [quicwg/base-drafts] Go Back to Single Packet Num… Nick Banks
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Go Back to Single Packet… Nick Banks
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Go Back to Single Packet… ekr
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Go Back to Single Packet… ianswett
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Go Back to Single Packet… Nick Banks
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Go Back to Single Packet… ekr
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Go Back to Single Packet… Nick Banks
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Go Back to Single Packet… ianswett
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Go Back to Single Packet… Nick Banks
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Go Back to Single Packet… Nick Banks
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Go Back to Single Packet… Nick Banks
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Go Back to Single Packet… Kazuho Oku
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Go Back to Single Packet… Nick Banks
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Go Back to Single Packet… Nick Banks
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Go Back to Single Packet… Mark Nottingham
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Go Back to Single Packet… Mark Nottingham