IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify PADDING vs PING frames (#838)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Fri, 13 October 2017 20:42 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 2E2E212895E for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 13:42:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.402
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.402 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_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 35iUZR9aC4dn for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 13:42:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from o10.sgmail.github.com (o10.sgmail.github.com [167.89.101.201]) (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 11D4E132620 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 13:42:50 -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=rv1fR39UMcaTebaXbBbgSOyB81Q=; b=j+bpXMvys1qaooE8 NlLTT+PBPHkL7Anp66hnh8QgmGpWRDpKv+0kGmgd1CBq13uUnrjLVs9U3u8dbg4d AIWhe8skPYeYfZ4QYuV1i+EWKhTiLAr+kJj2bFljrKfOaDgzDqVh/MH3t3oz/1rn N7cmyzR66rFdy3UIC8fgZv5AA9Y=
Received: by filter0843p1mdw1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter0843p1mdw1-7661-59E12549-2 2017-10-13 20:42:49.096869787 +0000 UTC
Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net [192.30.253.16]) by ismtpd0004p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id bTZpMVpIRPSdml2B1ITYJQ for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 20:42:49.114 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 20:42:49 +0000
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab2abecb4d64c2bae8535332aafc73e4f4c33ec44392cf0000000115f8e74992a169ce0fb03aff@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/838/336562212@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/838@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/838@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify PADDING vs PING frames (#838)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_59e125493fff_2dca3f84036f6f28101919"; 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
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak03pkObmwf3iw/4pl+A85LZKXIZKY20fMsEa6 94+oLxGduUppwE9VrCPUjUWoIIAEqS5BiP/AjDVfK8z9dcllkHmFqddH8QAUo+KGR0sDR3tvTFSGav lGxBUcEfU9uD8wYdzUJWFL6qQPM3D/hJfRN/Mu0pu4Rl9uv4dVBpB74fsg==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/kpbAjmlCGo7-ZzhciKG0M1QRQSY>
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, 13 Oct 2017 20:42:51 -0000

Padding in the crypto layer is still padding and hence bytes on the wire.  I think we should have a consistent story for padding, regardless of whether it's in QUIC or in TLS, rather than treating TLS padding as an entirely different beast.

-- 
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/838#issuecomment-336562212

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status