Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Requiring per application data in session ticket seems wrong (#3028)

MikkelFJ <> Fri, 13 September 2019 06:15 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B771120090 for <>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:15:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.382
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.382 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_24=1.618, 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 xmtR4KUJm5V6 for <>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:15:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A3F1712004D for <>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:15:41 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:15:40 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1568355340; bh=0Gm1OmaDA6Y1BTIPFc01HOudVKl75MSrbSjceN/2Frg=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=n6GYHNQmfAnCiVpN3hnrfB9/okU8YiPYVfE6ZqTrVHunqwSaZHUXYY4D59A3bdOFZ btonjkZLT3wroN5O/ROW34YeXCP/yZLLKfEpM/q8TL9n80k/SJZF+wvdFGCETAQ3m1 W4t+H1bFA4tsv8hkheeQUBamv/qWIOtHn/FygyrY=
From: MikkelFJ <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3028/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Requiring per application data in session ticket seems wrong (#3028)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d7b340c86c42_139f3f97cfccd96c491ab"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: mikkelfj
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, 13 Sep 2019 06:15:44 -0000

@kazuho Assuming things work as you say and a client receives a token from ALPN-X, and assuming the client does not remember tokens per ALPN, then you can have another ALPN named ALPN-Y in another session receiving the token generated for ALPN-X. If the ALPN-Y endpoint does not understand how to at least ignore ALPN-X data in the token, you can get undefined behaviour.

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