Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Improve KEY_PHASE description (#43)

Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com> Fri, 09 December 2016 03:08 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 AB285129CDD for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Dec 2016 19:08:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.896 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_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.896, 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 nvSO2b8U57hq for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Dec 2016 19:08:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from o9.sgmail.github.com (o9.sgmail.github.com [167.89.101.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C8B7A129631 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Dec 2016 19:08:37 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=github.com; h=from:reply-to:to:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=G+oBSH4ZZOPl7+go150/k9ogdqs=; b=LSf3hHNGNZO4LUHX yC926xrFU6wCa2OQmA6iODysSDoyw5G8Yk3Fhf6S/mMrzHT/fHprCf5djuHWvZ8i gQqEqpGE5yC4SJb0c+XbeGxH8ugpBDhcdOHG0/s6TJvD77f4fSJHcJ1B8En1P+Jc pgB3E02Ejxbu/6A61RrMcDRdz5E=
Received: by filter0607p1mdw1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter0607p1mdw1-32577-584A2032-1B 2016-12-09 03:08:34.299095869 +0000 UTC
Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net [192.30.253.17]) by ismtpd0006p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id hOtYljQFRteLRSAZ4eyTXg for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 09 Dec 2016 03:08:34.312 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2016 19:08:34 -0800
From: Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/43/review/12163504@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/43@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/43@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Improve KEY_PHASE description (#43)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_584a203232033_57bd3fbfcf20714028172"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: martinthomson
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak3bjyzVDaXyoEWMGzKJXFEXGwfsitUL2oRIve QGj63eeutQX91TjXMOhnvtOT+whqR6kW/BvUorSq9lmOV1QgofbblkU0k1dGPo/LdTcpc3+/YqhSjK TnfXtmqJdw50dpoHseE0h7gDoxzHRvsMf3XpGKkHgKMmhUpY76mkWB6f6L6zSHOHT6XMosu/8B5IuH g=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/xcdjtT7x8l8JE00Hplg3b3wWU7Y>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab6fa51db76b278dcfdb2642b944d212fc736e995b92cf000000011461e23292a169ce0b74c956@reply.github.com>
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, 09 Dec 2016 03:08:40 -0000

martinthomson commented on this pull request.



> +decrypt these packets, which will be unsuccessful.  Though a server that has
+1-RTT keys can safely discard any unprotected handshake messages from the
+client, an unprotected ACK frame could indicate that the server needs to
+retransmit its own handshake messages.  ACK frames therefore cannot be
+discarded.
+
+Until the server has received a positive acknowledgment for all of its
+unprotected handshake messages, either in the form of an explicit acknowledgment
+or implicitly through the use of 1-RTT keys, it MUST NOT discard packets with a
+KEY_PHASE of 0 if they cannot be decrypted successfully.  If these packets are
+unprotected and contain ACK frames, those ACK frames MUST be recovered and used
+to determine whether to retransmit TLS handshake messages.
+
+TBD:
+
+: We could observe/require that all unprotected packets are marked with a

I like this logic.  I will make that change.

I suspect that servers will likely have very different tolerances for 0-RTT packets, particularly in the absence of the ClientHello. The ClientHello will probably be the only place that we can put a source address validation token.

-- 
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/43