Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] unrecoverable loss pattern leads to deadlock (#2863)

Jana Iyengar <> Tue, 22 October 2019 08:14 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA56F1200CC for <>; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 01:14:37 -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_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 FW0h3X9GbHnB for <>; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 01:14:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1ABC1120052 for <>; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 01:14:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5ED3B6A1C18 for <>; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 01:14:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1571732075; bh=Kn8z97hqmuc10ZkYURm//+CelutwkII/laAZebaCSjY=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=Atv3Se0rVa1GhHaKRLEPQdzrxnRWby5JWI+UUsPPS2BqGp/hvJHq+ujTRxRZGj6Ut IkXHAWnrfU7XeL8vdhFv5pKpb88lBbP6QEdMJ90vccubqeo+A0wV5DRX9k7Aw+wuEG a3g9pokPA6E6zx01b9sm7VCmwXjT3vku8vZu+EVw=
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 01:14:35 -0700
From: Jana Iyengar <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2863/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] unrecoverable loss pattern leads to deadlock (#2863)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5daeba6b4f99e_7013fe2288cd9681328c2"; 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
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 08:14:38 -0000

What @kazuho points out is a problem. Keeping HS keys forever prevents the deadlock, but it does so by admitting that HS packets can be sent forever. This means after migration as well. That is something we don't consider in the spec. 

@ianswett: I don't think you're right about this:
> I'm arguing the client should never have unacknowledged Handshake data when it migrates, because it waits for handshake confirmation to migrate and at that point, all Handshake data should be discarded.
Handshake data is discarded when the handshake keys are dropped, not when confirmation is reached (see [section 5.3 in recovery draft]( Now with handshake keys forever, the client can keep retransmitting forever. And as @kazuho notes, the server can surely send keep retransmitting as well since if it hasn't reached confirmation yet.

There are a few ways to curb this... but I'm strongly inclined towards an explicit signal from both sides indicating handshake confirmation, after which migration can be initiated.

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