IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Strengthen 2119 language around tokens. (#2124)

Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com> Thu, 13 December 2018 00:16 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 29822130F6C for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 16:16:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.46
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.46 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1.46, 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] 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 cKX8biCFXQkq for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 16:16:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-5.smtp.github.com (out-5.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C663130F58 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 16:16:46 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 16:16:45 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1544660205; bh=bCMzgjzGskWziAyvTGPUcD0v6gHRTmfWX/hA/fTB13c=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=HVmiqPbWSES3FFe89VIEpDBPTA7WHc9Li+VC26LrBsGkTDby5HjrK8EeRr4MX4STP oRzT6iNbN0yJMUVqfWScZZRLsyw4JXxMOxmW9lT4uSZjr+Z43ZK8nTcrPerK/bUlpm OZmRRgmqojjUnPugSvDPlImXgJuJQ+i3wJDWNDyo=
From: Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abe4fbf598d3ce78461c5c45eaa1f5b62bb5fb1d8992cf00000001182966ed92a169ce1742d764@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2124/review/184454725@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2124@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2124@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Strengthen 2119 language around tokens. (#2124)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c11a4ed3f920_22eb3ff7282d45c4321020"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: martinthomson
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/VFuk-qRrHnlZaRVyhlZQDfD6OzE>
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, 13 Dec 2018 00:16:48 -0000

martinthomson commented on this pull request.

The second change I like.  The first less so.

> @@ -1627,7 +1627,7 @@ interface.  A client needs to start the connection process over if it migrates
 prior to completing the handshake.
 
 When a server receives an Initial packet with an address validation token, it
-SHOULD attempt to validate it, unless it has already completed address
+MUST attempt to validate it, unless it has already completed address

We also use MUST for security problems.

> @@ -1610,7 +1610,7 @@ A resumption token SHOULD be constructed to be easily distinguishable from
 tokens that are sent in Retry packets as they are carried in the same field.
 
 If the client has a token received in a NEW_TOKEN frame on a previous connection
-to what it believes to be the same server, it can include that value in the
+to what it believes to be the same server, it SHOULD include that value in the

I think that we need text on why it might not.  I suspect that this is a MUST unless (sending from a new address) OR (you don't feel like it).

I think that the "can" is fine here.

-- 
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/2124#pullrequestreview-184454725

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email