Return-Path: 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 EDC3A1202E2 for ; Wed, 15 May 2019 08:27:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.01 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] 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 YJJdfedJQFD5 for ; Wed, 15 May 2019 08:26:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out-23.smtp.github.com (out-23.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.206]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DA5B120278 for ; Wed, 15 May 2019 08:26:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 08:26:57 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1557934017; bh=hFNLdbA3HFvCwTOu/PMJeygZ21/d3RoNTq6MHar+svE=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=lZ5tu2ofpjvNDVjeMzZ/4YFUq7mGzRjF/hO0Er7pN170j4Ua83730FXfRsZCT9i8g tSVLU2jzIOQgJMT2pk0+xVq980o5s67cBWTbxmLQYNS2du737s+AQ1XYmsPoRk6oQh VdT1dNsP99NfQmKrTuyc0GJdorkZV9lCGLNlaPtg= From: ianswett Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts To: quicwg/base-drafts Cc: Subscribed Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify server CONNECTION_CLOSE with Handshake (#2688) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5cdc2fc1a3676_49db3fcbb22cd964151712b"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ianswett X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org Archived-At: X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org 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: Wed, 15 May 2019 15:27:07 -0000 ----==_mimepart_5cdc2fc1a3676_49db3fcbb22cd964151712b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ianswett commented on this pull request. > @@ -2304,13 +2304,25 @@ the application requests that the connection be closed. The application protocol can use an CONNECTION_CLOSE frame with an appropriate error code to signal closure. -If the connection has been successfully established, endpoints MUST send any -CONNECTION_CLOSE frames in a 1-RTT packet. Prior to connection establishment a -peer might not have 1-RTT keys, so endpoints SHOULD send CONNECTION_CLOSE frames -in a Handshake packet. If the endpoint does not have Handshake keys, or it is -not certain that the peer has Handshake keys, it MAY send CONNECTION_CLOSE -frames in an Initial packet. If multiple packets are sent, they can be -coalesced (see {{packet-coalesce}}) to facilitate retransmission. +When sending CONNECTION_CLOSE, the goal is to ensure that a peer will process +the frame. Generally, this means sending the frame in a packet with the highest +level of packet protection to avoid the packet being discarded. However, during +the handshake, it is possible that more advanced packet protection keys are not +available to a peer, so the frame MAY be replicated in a packet that uses a +lower packet protection level. + +If the handshake is confirmed, endpoints MUST send any CONNECTION_CLOSE frames That makes it sound a bit too much like one should close the connection upon completing the handshake. I think If works better, though "After" could also work. -- 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/2688#discussion_r284315652 ----==_mimepart_5cdc2fc1a3676_49db3fcbb22cd964151712b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

@ianswett commented on this pull request.

In draft-ietf-quic-transport.md:

> @@ -2304,13 +2304,25 @@ the application requests that the connection be closed.  The application
 protocol can use an CONNECTION_CLOSE frame with an appropriate error code to
 signal closure.
 
-If the connection has been successfully established, endpoints MUST send any
-CONNECTION_CLOSE frames in a 1-RTT packet.  Prior to connection establishment a
-peer might not have 1-RTT keys, so endpoints SHOULD send CONNECTION_CLOSE frames
-in a Handshake packet.  If the endpoint does not have Handshake keys, or it is
-not certain that the peer has Handshake keys, it MAY send CONNECTION_CLOSE
-frames in an Initial packet.  If multiple packets are sent, they can be
-coalesced (see {{packet-coalesce}}) to facilitate retransmission.
+When sending CONNECTION_CLOSE, the goal is to ensure that a peer will process
+the frame.  Generally, this means sending the frame in a packet with the highest
+level of packet protection to avoid the packet being discarded.  However, during
+the handshake, it is possible that more advanced packet protection keys are not
+available to a peer, so the frame MAY be replicated in a packet that uses a
+lower packet protection level.
+
+If the handshake is confirmed, endpoints MUST send any CONNECTION_CLOSE frames

That makes it sound a bit too much like one should close the connection upon completing the handshake. I think If works better, though "After" could also work.

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

----==_mimepart_5cdc2fc1a3676_49db3fcbb22cd964151712b--