Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Move stateless reset token to the end (#842)

[Mike Bishop <[e-mail]>]

MikeBishop approved this pull request.

LGTM.

>  A server copies the connection ID field from the packet that triggers the
 stateless reset.  A server omits the connection ID if explicitly configured to
 do so, or if the client packet did not include a connection ID.
 
+The Packet Number field is set to a randomized value.  The server SHOULD send a
+packet with a short header and a type of 0x01.  This produces the shortest
+possible packet number encoding, which minimizes the perceived gap between the
+last packet that the server sent and this packet.  A server MAY use a different
+short header type, indicating a different packet number length, but this allows
+for the message to be identified as a stateless reset more easily using

It's not the identification we care about, but the fact that an observer could identify the SR by seeing a packet number jump.  If the number is only eight bits long, then it's harder for an observer to infer a large jump.

> @@ -1595,11 +1600,11 @@ CONNECTION_CLOSE or APPLICATION_CLOSE frame if it has sufficient state to do so.
 #### Detecting a Stateless Reset
 
 A client detects a potential stateless reset when a packet with a short header
-cannot be decrypted.  The client then performs a constant-time comparison of the
-16 octets that follow the Connection ID with the Stateless Reset Token provided
-by the server in its transport parameters.  If this comparison is successful,
-the connection MUST be terminated immediately.  Otherwise, the packet can be
-discarded.
+either cannot be decrypted or is marked as a potential duplicate.  The client
+then performs a constant-time comparison of the last 16 octets of the packet
+with the Stateless Reset Token provided by the server in its transport
+parameters.  If this comparison is successful, the connection MUST be terminated

Any of the above seem fine for now; we'll want to tie this in with @janaiyengar's Unified Theory of Connection Closure when that lands.

-- 
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/842#pullrequestreview-68452414