Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] amplification attack using Retry and VN triggered by coalesced Initial packets (#2259)

[Kazuho Oku <[e-mail]>]

> State is exactly what I'm concerned about. I'd like to avoid allocating state for 67 QUIC packets due to a single datagram. With my proposed requirement, you can at most have 4 QUIC packets per datagram.

I do not get the same numbers.

With @martinthomson's approach, an endpoint needs one boolean when parsing a datagram. The value is flipped when you send a Retry, and prohibits the rest of the packets belonging to the same boolean from issuing another Retry.

With your proposal, an endpoint needs to maintain at least four booleans to detect if any of the packets have been seen more than once in a datagram.

Therefore, I think that @martinthomson's approach requires less state.

> I haven't implemented PMTUD yet, and as far as I can see, the PMTU section doesn't say anything about coalesced packets.

In Kista, we discussed about prepending long header packets (that do not authenticate) that contain enough information for the load balancer to forward ICMP response to the server.

-- 
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/2259#issuecomment-450711758