IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Required state for retaining unacked RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frames is unbound (#3509)

Marten Seemann <notifications@github.com> Wed, 11 March 2020 03:50 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 6E2513A109C for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 20:50:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.482
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.482 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, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 TlPWccMDWfHA for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 20:50:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-18.smtp.github.com (out-18.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 059213A109A for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 20:50:00 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 20:50:00 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1583898600; bh=Zx6qiHFO9yVPpi7caMr+/qLxjkt5d5PfeGnebBZcCEA=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=ZFgQodt8zAfBhKZJOmjp3gFfjM6YxyGQIosprLuMW2w2v7VJXlqXwgh1V7GV1qyhP 0LLCUS6hLDluyvy8QAANpxxvB56X1V8rE8SefQ19D52BjBYK2R8M2vWAcWq4qOcXhI LJMLdDw9p+IRy8lPSbc2oBXgnNmD5tq0TzAo3Me0=
From: Marten Seemann <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK7BNBAAZ32ZHOR5BEF4ORAOREVBNHHCFAMG5E@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3509/597430322@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3509@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3509@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Required state for retaining unacked RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frames is unbound (#3509)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e685fe847742_5cbf3fbb8becd96c11112c"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: marten-seemann
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/hN3sbKCIQfuAUV6FLsUL_uIxE88>
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, 11 Mar 2020 03:50:02 -0000

I'm not sure I understand the attack here. Why would an implementation need to keep track of acknowledgements of RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frames (other than for purposes of loss recovery, but then this applies to *any* retransmittable frame type)?

An endpoint sends a RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frame when it decides to not use the respective CID any longer. At this point, it can forget about the connection ID altogether. It might make sense to hold on to the stateless reset token for a while (3 PTO?) longer, in order to be able to detect stateless resets, but this is an optimization and wouldn't lead to unbounded state anyway.

-- 
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/3509#issuecomment-597430322

v2.28.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status