Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Mandatory distinction between token types (#3128)

Jana Iyengar <notifications@github.com> Fri, 01 November 2019 22:02 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 DCDDF12083A for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Nov 2019 15:02:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8 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_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 ffzbe0hzN4GE for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Nov 2019 15:02:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-24.smtp.github.com (out-24.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.207]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1B1512082F for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Nov 2019 15:02:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-28f8021.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-28f8021.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.25.98]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0023C6A0C4B for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Nov 2019 15:02:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1572645747; bh=o9MjICRUUy9qGE/u/6KAAKqrqfn0Zs0cJdkYZhLHnlw=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=MgsGvrrua7MqYbzmHmr9JtDjraA6TjkJr5ZTiukLeyrG9EtbjQNhJMDt7U89KKZ73 iMn7UyA/7F/laWTwf6IJ+g4epoY0E1+ROrpY0crNZoa6uGotxizFpFyXMl308bjTdi dQhJh8t+sAJqqGmxulibqrmjZlbCLrrCqnbj90yI=
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2019 15:02:26 -0700
From: Jana Iyengar <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK6SESQTZJVPHFAAV7F3ZHWAFEVBNHHB43A2P4@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3128/review/310713842@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3128@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3128@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Mandatory distinction between token types (#3128)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5dbcab72e5a5a_21483fb4b28cd95c60026"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: janaiyengar
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/sTFWU7Z3CPGsXk0msJUsL3V0K3s>
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, 01 Nov 2019 22:02:30 -0000

janaiyengar commented on this pull request.

A few comments. 

> @@ -1623,6 +1623,14 @@ also constrained in what they can send by the limits set by the congestion
 controller.  Clients are only constrained by the congestion controller.
 
 
+### Token Construction
+
+Tokens sent in NEW_TOKEN frames or Retry packets MUST be constructed in a way

```suggestion
A token sent in a NEW_TOKEN frame or a Retry packet MUST be constructed in a way
```

> @@ -1675,22 +1683,20 @@ one.  The client MUST NOT use the token provided in a Retry for future
 connections. Servers MAY discard any Initial packet that does not carry the
 expected token.
 
-A token SHOULD be constructed in a way that allows the server to distinguish it
-from tokens that are sent in Retry packets as they are carried in the same
-field.
-
-The token MUST NOT include information that would allow it to be linked by an
-on-path observer to the connection on which it was issued.  For example, it
-cannot include the connection ID or addressing information unless the values are
-encrypted.
-
 Unlike the token that is created for a Retry packet, there might be some time
 between when the token is created and when the token is subsequently used.
 Thus, a token SHOULD have an expiration time, which could be either an explicit

Make this a MUST too? I don't see why this is a SHOULD.

>  Unlike the token that is created for a Retry packet, there might be some time
 between when the token is created and when the token is subsequently used.
 Thus, a token SHOULD have an expiration time, which could be either an explicit
 expiration time or an issued timestamp that can be used to dynamically calculate
 the expiration time.  A server can store the expiration time or include it in an
 encrypted form in the token.
 
+A token issued with NEW_TOKEN MUST NOT include information that would allow
+values to be linked by an on-path observer to the connection on which it was
+issued.  For example, it cannot include the previous connection ID or addressing
+information unless the values are encrypted.  Information that allows the server

Move this "unless" clause up to the first sentence. The unless applies to the MUST NOT.

-- 
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/3128#pullrequestreview-310713842