IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Reserved versions will "probably" never represent a real protocol? (#2430)

Mike Bishop <notifications@github.com> Thu, 07 February 2019 23:15 UTC

Return-Path: <bounces+848413-a050-quic-issues=ietf.org@sgmail.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 C2A42130E62 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 15:15:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.001 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_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 l3pUIJhAO6oT for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 15:15:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from o5.sgmail.github.com (o5.sgmail.github.com [192.254.113.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5ACD130E79 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 15:15:12 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; h=from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=RVkah0rLdTooLYA+X8Y3RKjNkfU=; b=wjSW11ayqLBO19TE GHHWq4zT4IR1ij6DmdzlbctbbNgij6QI9DzezBp8r+vtoLBwvl+GFXQZwRxU1dEZ ssxs8sh9IN1q3Wb+6ohjArtayN7VfCiKhtSTnBHTBYS+UE0LdJW5pCh6T0i6RzNd jneS+lEBvwZrnBHVkPTadoPvDLo=
Received: by filter1587p1mdw1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter1587p1mdw1-21659-5C5CBBFE-37 2019-02-07 23:15:10.725183884 +0000 UTC m=+180959.098354152
Received: from github-lowworker-baaab27.cp1-iad.github.net (unknown [192.30.252.33]) by ismtpd0005p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id PiCXgS-iTBqDoIl9PSjxPg for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 07 Feb 2019 23:15:10.689 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from github.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by github-lowworker-baaab27.cp1-iad.github.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5BF880677 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 15:15:10 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2019 23:15:10 +0000
From: Mike Bishop <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab90bb60b49d40d96307b2cf822703955fa9f2626092cf0000000118747dfe92a169ce18482873@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2430/461627963@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2430@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2430@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Reserved versions will "probably" never represent a real protocol? (#2430)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c5cbbfea17d8_26d63f9176ed45bc3175ef"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: MikeBishop
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak1+dshZmOT0SbJ6OUmzhNgeNlf53Or4MxW/AS T1ifvnCuYOE1N9K/bJ5Odbh072QiK3smvuBlw7CieWfCXupkXcXHt9yShYSKDa8PP1Y98emZW3feE6 PFNEillBZb3SpKniPLmH0Peu3f6SI35l3SRFdP7cLqfPbdjDnewpsG5Z3+5eSgFT3zfS4th6hQxMS1 w=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/c5T-Gb1ObdTqLCfAhE-bK-Nb20Y>
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, 07 Feb 2019 23:15:15 -0000

We fear that someone might ossify if they discover that these are *definitely* not real protocol versions.  On the other hand, the thing that breaks is use of these as real protocol versions, which I don't believe we're trying to achieve.  If the middlebox is generating *accurate* VN packets, that seems entirely reasonable (and indistinguishable from actual VN packets).  If they're generating inaccurate VN packets, then our anti-downgrade protections that we've decided to implement RSN will break.

On the other hand, if these ever are real protocol versions, then a junk grease packet using the reserved version will fail to parse as a valid Initial and will just fail rather than eliciting a VN response.

This seems like an impossible battle to win, and a lot of subtlety to expect of middlebox vendors.  Write what we mean and move on.

-- 
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/2430#issuecomment-461627963

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email