Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify initial UDP datagram padding (#2519)

Kazuho Oku <> Wed, 13 March 2019 22:36 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E34761310B5 for <>; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 15:36:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.001
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.001 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KcweC7Djx0BX for <>; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 15:36:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9BEC81310E2 for <>; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 15:36:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed;; 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=Aoj7AcvW5FKNM+ZVcTiiyoEriHc=; b=ZdN+OEqGprbMM188 afO3F0r9NNCvdvxZ0gwNEkIVlU08d7pQJQ6n5SSdh1RNVqcHm7nAUdeDSUBV4MPK 9fwdgs3zqHuYJqEQvPZfmCGmNY0hHAkMSPNbpczFusQmJWl82zzQZeMoNfxs8MMg sWJzUVx1zBLlShMRo7iYUl11IBQ=
Received: by with SMTP id filter0849p1las1-26642-5C8985E0-27 2019-03-13 22:36:17.020244857 +0000 UTC m=+107836.707634751
Received: from (unknown []) by (SG) with ESMTP id 63WC4SFtRZq7sSTKbVR3gg for <>; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 22:36:16.837 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA96C2C036F for <>; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 15:36:16 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 22:36:17 +0000
From: Kazuho Oku <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2519/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify initial UDP datagram padding (#2519)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c8985e0c8f68_7cb83f99a72d45bc4273bf"; 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-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak3g0DaTtLe+N80D+XALtobql9rP3/RzzHOTn8 DK3kcPIYOFxPvWAjB56u3VF2zzAfsFNsB6RVobkKOSsFPGAweWJw4gB0sK+ZJQTlXUvlaRHiScmBqb nJBbsYhI0RP6xy8ethg5H/w9AlasOCOcUwmGaXepiHKOJxdc01D7ViU5QAHg8O6IHgSHFE88m81HvI 4=
Archived-At: <>
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, 13 Mar 2019 22:36:21 -0000

As stated in, I prefer to stop requiring the use of full-sized packets once the client observes a response from server. Reasons:
* QUIC stacks would have the logic to change rules based on if the peer's address has been validated due to the 3-packet rule on the server side. It's just about using the same logic for padding on the client side.
* Implementations that prefer to pad all the Initial packets it sends can do so anyways.
* Regardless of what we decide, the server side logic would be indifferent; i.e. create new connection context only when observing a full-sized Initial packet.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: