Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Lift single-packet ClientHello requirement? (#2928)

[Jana Iyengar <[e-mail]>]

As @mikkelfj says, I believe there was a concern about state at the server
for connections that have not yet been established, if it receives only
part of a ClientHello. I don't think this is a debilitating concern
however. I would like to air this for a little while though ... I remember
us using the assumption that the ClientHello is a single packet a few
times, and I'm not sure if we did document them all.

On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 2:31 PM MikkelFJ <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I believe a main motivation for a single packet is that it avoids binding
> a lot of state on the server which can be a significant DoS vector. If
> anything we can expect certificates to get smaller with more widespread use
> of EC25519. As to post quantum, lets make another QUIC version in about
> 30-60 years or so.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2928?email_source=notifications&email_token=ACUOBVEOGE7FJPC4OYE3WHTQA5FBLA5CNFSM4IGHDJG2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOD2UA2LY#issuecomment-514329903>,
> or mute the thread
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACUOBVGYEWRBGZ65Y5RWAIDQA5FBLANCNFSM4IGHDJGQ>
> .
>


-- 
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/2928#issuecomment-514333564