Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Fixed handshake key deadlock issue (#3093)

martinduke <> Tue, 22 October 2019 02:44 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65393120AED for <>; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:44:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.999 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_IMAGE_ONLY_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 Xk84d1BoynYO for <>; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:44:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C334F120AEC for <>; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:44:28 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:44:27 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1571712267; bh=CwnQHkf+hnGB5/Q/Epou/6YrD6pzKgvKXMCyoGjeG5A=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=ESpzjbiLBMVDAKTNl+JhaScha7UMGpUJpJHeT1mRSdHkAiwypWbpmOv5EnKud0s5m yOQqUzzGwXcO8a6D9hNfFIXNCCATizRPYn+1bvyN55W3vmv44GCuaOLIxoeDpkYsm6 XA5896W8kgJ8cFCalxpHm3gf9z4i5hZ176U0Bcto=
From: martinduke <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3093/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Fixed handshake key deadlock issue (#3093)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5dae6d0bd0817_34643fdf7d0cd9641386ea"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: martinduke
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
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: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 02:44:30 -0000

This diagram is incorrect. There is an ack from the client of 0.5rtt data,
but the ack-eliciting packet is not present in the diagram. If it were, the
client would have discarded its handshake keys and there is no deadlock.

On Mon, Oct 21, 2019, 6:28 PM ianswett <> wrote:

> Thanks for the diagram, and I'm happy to stick with the approach of
> keeping the keys forever.
> If we change nothing about the existing text, what you describe occurs,
> but as I suggested elsewhere, if we are going to delay dropping the
> Handshake keys(somewhat or indefinitely), I think we should update the text
> of transport or recovery to be clear that you can stop retransmitting any
> outstanding data in Handshake once you've received a 1-RTT ACK.
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <>,
> or unsubscribe
> <>
> .

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