Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Retransmit server initial upon second Initial (#3080)

martinduke <> Sat, 15 February 2020 20:41 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 988CD1200F4 for <>; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 12:41:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.596
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.596 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_28=1.404, 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 m4Xz14CL8I34 for <>; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 12:41:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 648F01200D7 for <>; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 12:41:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81B5F520477 for <>; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 12:41:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1581799261; bh=GMzvvnFHPQmfGqhKwBuxyxH2Ht8hyigrmvtzBDWOrRY=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=TYqEppDNsPiCI+tJwjIST5InsluJtXiRVFzARYBRTYrmsOiUlvxytQWCqmZggL22v oCA/QTYu0vcf2pYRBgWLDEjLkF5OjKH4X21qGQptyYu6OD2rs3Q+SvqXpISSoa2bCG eYIpYtpQVxbTCj/mbGCYPHN6aj8rQqgp6AuOaPYY=
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2020 12:41:01 -0800
From: martinduke <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3080/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Retransmit server initial upon second Initial (#3080)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e48575d70ffd_66893fac4e6cd95c1538c7"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: martinduke
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: Sat, 15 Feb 2020 20:41:04 -0000

martinduke requested changes on this pull request.

> @@ -519,6 +519,24 @@ bytes.
 Initial packets and Handshake packets may never be acknowledged, but they are
 removed from bytes in flight when the Initial and Handshake keys are discarded.
+### Speeding Up Handshake Completion
+When a server receives an Initial packet containing duplicate CRYPTO data,
+it can assume the client did not receive all of the server's CRYPTO data sent
+in Initial packets, or the client's estimated RTT is too small. When a
+client receives Handshake or 1-RTT packets prior to obtaining Handshake keys,
+it may assume some or all of the server's Initial packets were lost.

What is the consequence of the client assuming server initials were lost? What would it do in this case to speed up the handshake?

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