IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Limit the size of packets (#501)

janaiyengar <notifications@github.com> Fri, 05 May 2017 02:12 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 4BAEF126CBF for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 May 2017 19:12:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, 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 Z7D1TlPq-126 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 May 2017 19:12:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from o6.sgmail.github.com (o6.sgmail.github.com [192.254.113.101]) (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 C13151252BA for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 May 2017 19:12:36 -0700 (PDT)
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=L2zk6qx4JTQKd9QKIN0U2EITDIo=; b=ClTsSNOTNgkMeATF 0HvhfZvE1cZazf8q70W0mPhep75YwIkMhbK9LzL9fDBEGRBOkv8AKEmWz04LlKVk NOHFMLWI/SaxK0JcfXVLPZTjUFm/1NUbfQsCnHnf1HeiCqV+NWQOKX5K3KFhjzlO i9wvZ7hFYH3rHkba6jz+3yPVuvk=
Received: by filter0500p1mdw1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter0500p1mdw1-12655-590BDF91-42 2017-05-05 02:12:33.688337265 +0000 UTC
Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net [192.30.253.17]) by ismtpd0005p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id FWnWl76kRoSlTqal-Gb7FQ for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 05 May 2017 02:12:33.731 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 04 May 2017 19:12:33 -0700
From: janaiyengar <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab51354cf327ff1a1cd8f0a1bfd78c1f33c3cdbda792cf000000011523a19192a169ce0d7b300d@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/501/c299355241@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/501@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/501@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Limit the size of packets (#501)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_590bdf919eeb3_2bd53fc2535d5c3c49795"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: janaiyengar
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: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak3HGpvr/VpJeqJ8oz6uYPO5oAsNv5RNo49/iR AAFMcKLM062pWFPdtdAn6t+TsmQevxfJHwxF035YQmy0x9PVRYIlVSoyUc3gZ+gwHEC6pPcfIoHCnQ x+Tn6kG2YPEIjY3MtZS6L/bMBiaM5n0lJXmwlZuEd4z+bHUAmCgDn4ffNeYW1GuPp6voYbUHwxET1n I=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/eRhrh-et496i1g7Zw2Lu7nb-tVk>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Fri, 05 May 2017 02:12:38 -0000

Yes, just TLS + QUIC is more complex than TLS + TCP. Having worked on the SCTP implementation in BSD which had no hq but only transport, I can say that adding multistreaming alone adds a fair bit of complexity. (I'm talking about prod code, not a lab prototype.)

It surely is possible to pare it down to the point that much of the flexibility is lost, to the point that the endpoint can't do AEAD over 1232 bytes (not 1280 bytes.) But why would one care to use QUIC at that point and not just do TCP (or even TCP over UDP)?

-- 
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/pull/501#issuecomment-299355241

v2.34.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status