IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] don't allow 0 as a packet number (#832)

MikkelFJ <notifications@github.com> Thu, 19 October 2017 16:29 UTC

Return-Path: <bounces+848413-a050-quic-issues=ietf.org@sgmail.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 2015F132D8A for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:29:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.182
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.182 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, 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 MMBD_cquOcjX for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:29:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from o5.sgmail.github.com (o5.sgmail.github.com [192.254.113.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6EC7E13235C for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:29:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; h=from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=HyvP33uNxSTVYQycmFP1M+eLRo8=; b=TNKXKSk/frCvBED1 GUwHrAkvFWq3BiBYuv4Ijq1GVlVarMGJ+X03iKLadtt8UHJzlogMfnXgH8/L+pPh 0wx/CCS11yPB0v44XGZ5EPA63wdKBe4KPlUmMaU70FRUqOMc4EXnjPQFJQsSrG8p cwvjzSrUagStP2wfbsWKyaBOyJY=
Received: by filter1177p1mdw1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter1177p1mdw1-23403-59E8D2DF-39 2017-10-19 16:29:19.808526893 +0000 UTC
Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net [192.30.253.16]) by ismtpd0001p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id qqGpOw62SNaBmZcL1CaLJw for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Oct 2017 16:29:19.540 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 16:29:20 +0000
From: MikkelFJ <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab5d0bab9be031580e7fb9b95739ae2333e2ea00b492cf00000001160094df92a169ce0fa74d75@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/832/337963262@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/832@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/832@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] don't allow 0 as a packet number (#832)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_59e8d2df6bce4_280bf3f97f2dc0f2c182354"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: mikkelfj
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak00DwWy9VuloRniyY0lkgD1T7Hm+SroAxzVcN 72WhgxXAOhvpbLDIhTk6oSroN62VBsex4xvjIDr84H486inLWX/f31ngLRNUkt7TTbqgEcWIBuDirN JSSQ7zRaH70dM0gXH8eTbzUCxvBmuzeMfNvHzqIO5wUIsZsntp3f5LFZZDLRwuvcqT/nu/cwE6764P k=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/tnW66G_PRDcxcAMQrQT1fePH0xQ>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 16:29:23 -0000

@ekr thanks for links. FWIW I thinks those limits on key usage in the TLS spec ought to be a MUST, not a SHOULD. Maybe 2^24.5 is conservative, but there is a point where GCM it falls apart more so than some ciphers. (GCM is fine, but only when respect its limits).

-- 
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/832#issuecomment-337963262

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status