Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Allow endpoints to generate traffic keys asynchronously (#3874)

Jana Iyengar <notifications@github.com> Wed, 05 August 2020 21:38 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 29BEF3A0FAE for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 14:38:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.101
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.101 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_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, 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 H3p2is-QC9RV for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 14:38:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-18.smtp.github.com (out-18.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73DD93A0FAF for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 14:38:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-5825cd4.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-5825cd4.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.22.68]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C765340094 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 14:38:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1596663507; bh=VZ7MPlOzFpkJWSJlpuVTfOlGc1F07es0QtBUBvMRONE=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=WeiGUq87nd0bPvTsCtKFhd7UR7sCEp2tOCpmfFF9b4g9Q3woxKYQNt16jONlbnvpY whOYU3sfjS7Im+7c+iINSFYylaWr3dNbihl7BSuEPYZTlCo+Q4y3w5QWs8Hc9V6fod f0gkRduqkPqijRoZ+x13X0kUtw/bt9tkJtammnUA=
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2020 14:38:27 -0700
From: Jana Iyengar <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJKZHZPSDDFWSQ5GR5XF5G4D5HEVBNHHCN3MY3A@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3874/review/461943305@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3874@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3874@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Allow endpoints to generate traffic keys asynchronously (#3874)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5f2b26d37c2b3_39b116f8440842"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: janaiyengar
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/l75yjdzUV_eX2NJhWARvAl4is7s>
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, 05 Aug 2020 21:38:30 -0000

@janaiyengar commented on this pull request.



> @@ -1232,10 +1255,7 @@ OnAckReceived(ack, pn_space):
       IncludesAckEliciting(newly_acked_packets)):
     latest_rtt =
       now() - newly_acked_packets.largest().time_sent
-    ack_delay = 0
-    if (pn_space == ApplicationData):
-      ack_delay = ack.ack_delay
-    UpdateRtt(ack_delay)
+    UpdateRtt(ack.ack_delay)

Done.

> @@ -337,29 +337,47 @@ samples, and rttvar is the variation in the RTT samples, estimated using a
 mean variation.
 
 The calculation of smoothed_rtt uses path latency after adjusting RTT samples
-for acknowledgement delays. These delays are computed using the ACK Delay field
-of the ACK frame as described in Section 19.3 of {{QUIC-TRANSPORT}}. For packets
-sent in the Application Data packet number space, a peer limits any delay in
-sending an acknowledgement for an ack-eliciting packet to no greater than the
-value it advertised in the max_ack_delay transport parameter. Consequently, when
-a peer reports an acknowledgment delay that is greater than its max_ack_delay,
-the delay is attributed to reasons out of the peer's control, such as scheduler
-latency at the peer or loss of previous ACK frames.  Any delays beyond the
-peer's max_ack_delay are therefore considered effectively part of path delay and
-incorporated into the smoothed_rtt estimate.
+for acknowledgement delays. These delays are computed using the ACK Delay
+field of the ACK frame as described in Section 19.3 of {{QUIC-TRANSPORT}}.
+
+A peer MUST immediately acknowledge all ack-eliciting Initial packets.

The text in the transport draft is weak. I'm moving this there and making it stronger.

> +available. When this is not the case, the peer MUST immediately acknowledge all
+ack-eliciting Handshake packets, and MUST NOT delay acknowledgement of
+ack-eliciting 0-RTT, or 1-RTT packets for any longer than the period that it
+advertised in the max_ack_delay transport parameter (Section 18.2 of
+{{QUIC-TRANSPORT}}).

I've restructured the text a bit differently, see what you think.

> -for acknowledgement delays. These delays are computed using the ACK Delay field
-of the ACK frame as described in Section 19.3 of {{QUIC-TRANSPORT}}. For packets
-sent in the Application Data packet number space, a peer limits any delay in
-sending an acknowledgement for an ack-eliciting packet to no greater than the
-value it advertised in the max_ack_delay transport parameter. Consequently, when
-a peer reports an acknowledgment delay that is greater than its max_ack_delay,
-the delay is attributed to reasons out of the peer's control, such as scheduler
-latency at the peer or loss of previous ACK frames.  Any delays beyond the
-peer's max_ack_delay are therefore considered effectively part of path delay and
-incorporated into the smoothed_rtt estimate.
+for acknowledgement delays. These delays are computed using the ACK Delay
+field of the ACK frame as described in Section 19.3 of {{QUIC-TRANSPORT}}.
+
+A peer MUST immediately acknowledge all ack-eliciting Initial packets.
+
+Prior to handshake confirmation, a peer might not have the packet protection

We use the term "packet protection keys" for both encryption and decryption keys, but I've made the "decrypting" more explicit now.

-- 
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/3874#discussion_r466018540