IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Which DCID do Handshake retransmissions use? (#3348)

Nick Banks <notifications@github.com> Wed, 15 January 2020 15:22 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 5FF74120025 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jan 2020 07:22:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.596
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.596 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_28=1.404, 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: 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 RyKpbNEQr_Vf for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jan 2020 07:22:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-4.smtp.github.com (out-4.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3ABEB12004A for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2020 07:22:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from github-lowworker-cd7bc13.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-cd7bc13.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.25.102]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6065DC61F2A for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2020 07:22:16 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1579101736; bh=jCqv4S8CB13jqFrx/F23+CggFGhJUVPAmb6N9TzHKjg=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=dlX3TFgXCHP9NWtwb7kZsbG/lYCI8ElYfFvDxaE3RvMnkkYHDjEd3G8CLV3Rszhzf 8NrzG/CBvYUie7u23AhBTSx8JKE98SAJR81pOq+/PiHexnjFIx+aKpZdXheofNOK3B 6AQxO9K84FS9KG0tuLvLlGhPIBmlNc4QLfqli+L8=
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 07:22:16 -0800
From: Nick Banks <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK6PMZC5CYXL6RZ6CPV4FRQKREVBNHHCBR5T4M@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3348/574708737@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3348@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3348@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Which DCID do Handshake retransmissions use? (#3348)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e1f2e2851dda_730d3f80e9acd95c4434"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: nibanks
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/p8814z2kiAsu-OH84sX93wQL0zo>
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, 15 Jan 2020 15:22:19 -0000

@ianswett that is just indicating when a client should change DCID in response to receiving a Initial/Retry packet with a new CID. I don't think anything restricts either side from sending NEW_CONNECTION_ID frames in their first 1-RTT packets and their peers immediately using them for any packets (including handshake) they send.

Personally, I don't have a problem with (a). I think that no matter what receivers will have to handle the multiple paths but single CID scenario, so I would prefer not to special case the handshake. I also don't think we have handshake confirmation problems because an endpoint should only send a NEW_CONNECTION_ID out when it's able to accept it. Then, if the peer can decrypt the packet with the new CID, I see no reason why it shouldn't be allowed to use it immediately.

-- 
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/3348#issuecomment-574708737

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email