Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] If you want a Stateless Reset you need to send a much larger packet than before (#2770)

David Schinazi <> Mon, 17 June 2019 16:50 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A4241202A9 for <>; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 09:50:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.02
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.02 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.415, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] 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 VPO63cCz1tLk for <>; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 09:50:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3C32120092 for <>; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 09:50:00 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 09:49:59 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1560790199; bh=cpa4EjIKp2l7dAexNa+Ftyd9fMJH9wJRbWHNKExgNVc=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=Dw/7IszWMjg3fCHO+mxABmeOa08XBDMihcz4BLzoedElLsQiPIR1Rq5cAOOr2RFM5 frrPXY33GbJrW0wFktrPY4cSi1EtRHh3i3Q269DyUvpRU3P2PyQlHevRUiJKhXoPmC XF7bDOGpuBOammfKE8EO8DmTXqTGv/vHJgcMXdbc=
From: David Schinazi <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2770/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] If you want a Stateless Reset you need to send a much larger packet than before (#2770)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d07c4b7d8b17_7cdc3fa240ccd964836896"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: DavidSchinazi
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: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 16:50:02 -0000

>From an offline conversation with @RyanAtGoogle , when client connection IDs are in use, Stateless Resets are inherently distinguishable from regular traffic because they do not carry the previously-used client connection ID. One might say that they could be confused for a change in connection ID, which is true. But let's assume we just changed from an 18 byte client connection ID to a 4-byte connection ID (which is specifically allowed by the spec), then that new packet is indistinguishable from a stateless reset.

So I propose that instead of having a minimum required size for stateless resets of 21 and a recommended minimum of 39, we can just say the minimum required size is 25. The important value here is the minimum non-zero connection ID length, not the maximum connection ID length.

This also means that the conversation about changing the maximum connection ID length is now orthogonal to stateless resets.

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