Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Attempt to make the stateless reset text better (#3007)

ianswett <> Fri, 06 September 2019 16:47 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDB11120934 for <>; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 09:47:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.999 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, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 ECRCWeQ13RhC for <>; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 09:47:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD7B612091B for <>; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 09:47:18 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2019 09:47:17 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1567788437; bh=shGx8EjxGwyxPokNhltXiIHWdelPyE3lDI7BZZjwMx0=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=M6TDpz5Gd09jjcCfx3EPxbp0S3M8jYQO8Fcca7b+bIQ5W9Ti229/adfyfBwZ6MLmq byc47ne3+R/jY0gl0qqcMB1HsQDzA0bXtOHvtesQb51+5MyzaPvd5FKJIl1VM2jf3J zsSUwkJ0/yMd6q7ne/wlvOj5g5PJ/rIxZ43qYbso=
From: ianswett <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3007/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Attempt to make the stateless reset text better (#3007)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d728d95a7d22_50453f7e7b8cd9601634bf"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ianswett
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: Fri, 06 Sep 2019 16:47:21 -0000

ianswett approved this pull request.

> -packet protection AEAD.  More unpredictable bytes might be necessary if the
-endpoint could have negotiated a packet protection scheme with a larger minimum
-AEAD expansion.
-An endpoint SHOULD NOT send a stateless reset that is significantly larger than
-the packet it receives.  Endpoints MUST discard packets that are too small to be
-valid QUIC packets.  With the set of AEAD functions defined in {{QUIC-TLS}},
-packets that are smaller than 21 bytes are never valid.
+To entities other than its intended recipient, a stateless reset will appear to
+be a packet with a short header.  For the stateless reset to appear as a valid
+QUIC packet, the Unpredictable Bits field needs to include at least 38 bits of
+data (or 6 bytes, less the two fixed bits).
+A minimum size of 21 bytes does not guarantee that a stateless reset is
+difficult to distinguish from other packets if the recipient requires the use of
+a connection ID.  In order to ensure that a stateless reset that appears to be

This second sentence is hard to follow.  How about "To prevent a resulting stateless reset from being distinguished from a valid packet, all packets ..."

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