IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Let Endpoints Ignore invalid Initial Packets (#1819)

martinduke <notifications@github.com> Fri, 05 October 2018 23:09 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 3D77C128B14 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 16:09:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.455
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.455 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.456, 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_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 EWi03g3BHpT7 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 16:09:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-6.smtp.github.com (out-6.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.197]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3471012872C for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Oct 2018 16:09:01 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2018 16:09:00 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1538780940; bh=R1hkXJg2QqaUrim2fBUATRDcHolHF+X5lWNEycqaBr8=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=gu4CRFkJ3ngOkUq5EVZJPkGdBa9U5ddhHxtW0eICZ4vjRarsx82TpUbD38/Rcm8+a xfeNH1yeFd2BUWGaaAEtpUMFIlnMvg6EeDuv75AzUou77ihSHBnnMuSrf+CRN+NpFh d4bqFK51fSCu8tVgphu1NA5dkXOswZBQmcz3KmX4=
From: martinduke <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab011ed5c0a30e21f83037be9456a221c58d89a86c92cf0000000117cfb10c92a169ce15cbb1a4@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1819/review/162228671@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1819@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1819@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Let Endpoints Ignore invalid Initial Packets (#1819)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5bb7ef0c7cada_4adb3fb068ed45c4891fd"; 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
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/pXPNi4AQsZUfIGH1rnslW5Y8DFQ>
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: Fri, 05 Oct 2018 23:09:03 -0000

martinduke commented on this pull request.



> @@ -736,6 +733,18 @@ and will contain a CRYPTO frame with an offset matching the size of the CRYPTO
 frame sent in the first Initial packet.  Cryptographic handshake messages
 subsequent to the first do not need to fit within a single UDP datagram.
 
+### Handling of Fatal Initial Packets
+
+The contents of some Initial packets may, according to this specification, force

I really don't want to go everywhere it says we MUST terminate the connection and then add "unless it's an Initial and ..." Inevitably it's a bit clunky.

Your language is fine, but I'd like to preserve the option to just drop the packet without running any timer. It's a simpler course of action for the endpoint and I don't see a significant downside.

-- 
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/1819#discussion_r223158298

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email