Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Padding requirement seems to be incorrect. (#3053)

Kazuho Oku <> Sat, 21 September 2019 02:20 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C22312008F for <>; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 19:20:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.596
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: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ruR2UWfN4KjD for <>; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 19:20:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB85812004F for <>; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 19:20:22 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 19:20:22 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1569032422; bh=Pb/bvlMO2of5sVCg3YtcIMMSkis7VasRmMTwfin6eVQ=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=Ad5kewAqX5WoEJxwjabdLeRc+/mBHJawt5t4ZqyagnqxnLCijiNjI6uN2Yb+cisgQ d1lQ90h9TVbgh0cBv7vcgB639PhgTbYgVweIfJde4ZgK6scMHN3POihLQxnHgcJWMn R9J7UgZjAWgc7dlQWnprqp3Xfm0LXYL+mkJuo0Ro=
From: Kazuho Oku <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3053/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Padding requirement seems to be incorrect. (#3053)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d8588e6f071_4cd63f82fdecd9601061b6"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: kazuho
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: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 02:20:25 -0000

>  I think that it should be any packets that contain Initial and don't contain Handshake or 1-RTT packets.

What we are talking here is a requirement specific to clients, and I am not sure if a client has a chance of sending Initial and Handshake packets at the same time. Quoting [Section 4.9.1]( of the TLS draft, "_a client MUST discard Initial keys when it first sends a Handshake packet_."

And even if there is a possibility of a client sending Initial and Handshake at the same moment, I do not think requiring the client to pad a packet that contains only an Initial is correct, as coalescing is an optional behavior to the send side. It would mean that clients coalescing the QUIC packets would send a non-padded packet, while clients not coalescing would send a padded Initial packet. That seems like an odd behavior.

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