[quicwg/base-drafts] Contradicting statement about when CID can be changed during the handshake (#1830)
Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com> Wed, 03 October 2018 03:10 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 0531913116D for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 20:10:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 lzR1VfhdybVm for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 20:10:51 -0700 (PDT)
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 7C7D6130FBD for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 20:10:51 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2018 20:10:49 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1538536249; bh=o8N+EkpTASNx//c5z6zhiy0ER45aXnImzr3xjgwE2x0=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=mtdcFzAsmfW1AkBuxK1jxoHPrTybJKCa1d2sft22uPAlUeiGwqre6GWhvjoji18vz zdO7xBczMGQaApLNRxZ2hjoXQDF1Yu9Xgy1PijpMlGyFO0RmgaG3hGkngTJidCgbDN ZZ8h1Kex3ter8atxEJtvfKDwfebbLDB1Evp9Nr40=
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab12fe8f34a09c178fe638ed92d6f3858d2bbafb1d92cf0000000117cbf53992a169ce15d32182@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1830@github.com>
Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] Contradicting statement about when CID can be changed during the handshake (#1830)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5bb4333986e12_7d443ff4c70d45c022242b"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: kazuho
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/dlqBqHyyb4BI4l2G3URvU1S59oc>
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: Wed, 03 Oct 2018 03:10:54 -0000
#1794 introduced the following sentence in section 4.4: > All subsequent Initial packets from the client MUST use the connection ID and token values from the Retry packet. I wonder if it contradicts with the following statement in section 4.10: > During the handshake, a client can receive both a Retry and an Initial packet, and thus be given two opportunities to update the Destination Connection ID it sends. A client MUST only change the value it sends in the Destination Connection ID in response to the first packet of each type it receives from the server (Retry or Initial); a server MUST set its value based on the Initial packet. Any additional changes are not permitted; if subsequent packets of those types include a different Source Connection ID, they MUST be discarded. My read is that section 4.10 allows CID of Initial packet to be changed twice at maximum, in case when the client first receives a Retry and then an Initial packet. However, section 4.4 does not allow the latter to happen. To me it seems like an editorial issue introduced in #1794, and IMO it might make sense to drop the description in section 4.4 by instead referring to the provision in 4.10. -- 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/1830
- [quicwg/base-drafts] Contradicting statement abou… Kazuho Oku
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Contradicting statement … Mike Bishop
- Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Contradicting statement … Martin Thomson