Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Subsequent Initial Packets with Token Field (#1649)

Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com> Mon, 13 August 2018 03:36 UTC

Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2018 20:36:32 -0700
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab94253426c3a0e3114afcef8627d1d4104ae7f0d092cf000000011788bec092a169ce14d6881b@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1649/412400638@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1649@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1649@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Subsequent Initial Packets with Token Field (#1649)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5b70fcc0402f6_68cf3fb0e52d45bc304878"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/v39R3ZyHxDx1yDieH_A7ix6m27A>

FWIW, my assumption has been that the token field will be empty for the subsequent Initial packets. 

IIRC, we have thought that it is possible to split Initial into two packet types (i.e. client's first flight and other obfuscated ones) even though we decided not to. The reason such split has been considered possible is because we have assumed that the token is only required for the client's first flight.

My understanding is that DDoS mitigation devices are required to remember the 5-tuple (or the CIDs) that are permitted to flow though, so that other types of packets (i.e., 0-rtt, handshake, 1-rtt) can be exchanged. Then, I do not see a reason why we need to include tokens in subsequent Initial packets.

-- 
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/1649#issuecomment-412400638

[quicwg/base-drafts] Subsequent Initial Packets w… Nick Banks
Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Subsequent Initial Packe… Martin Thomson
Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Subsequent Initial Packe… Kazuho Oku
Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Subsequent Initial Packe… Nick Banks
Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Subsequent Initial Packe… Kazuho Oku
Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Subsequent Initial Packe… Nick Banks
Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Subsequent Initial Packe… Kazuho Oku
Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Subsequent Initial Packe… Martin Thomson
Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Subsequent Initial Packe… Martin Thomson
Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Subsequent Initial Packe… janaiyengar