Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify server CONNECTION_CLOSE with Handshake (#2688)

Mike Bishop <notifications@github.com> Mon, 13 May 2019 18:24 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 A5B041200C4 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 May 2019 11:24:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.009
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.009 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, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] 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 pIREns8-HzWB for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 May 2019 11:24:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-21.smtp.github.com (out-21.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.204]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC4CA120021 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 May 2019 11:24:33 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 11:24:32 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1557771872; bh=h8psI1acLyJHN4sCCr6P8YVKCYo2F+3pVwRIlOyvRUY=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=coHcFmC0fa4/jvvKYsoGBZ2lh2XoLykzCVL1+qK978V8niBJsqtROrZ+01ZsvpEt4 DnaqRiytJ7EXJkN6RX6rslQAKh8NKDw0gNv1vHJ/e/J6f/p2orofeujxoVTTSJlC+B bcW70Gdtdm32p37It/F2WTmL07pwYvLFBNScm7aU=
From: Mike Bishop <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK3AISF5MR6IEOXAZOF243UOBEVBNHHBUYT4BY@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2688/review/236842317@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2688@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2688@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify server CONNECTION_CLOSE with Handshake (#2688)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5cd9b660db5bd_296a3f89a3acd96c7629cc"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: MikeBishop
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/y0Jf0AslU-ZKrD5QYAylfDDFoTc>
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: Mon, 13 May 2019 18:24:35 -0000

MikeBishop commented on this pull request.



> @@ -2307,10 +2307,14 @@ signal closure.
 If the connection has been successfully established, endpoints MUST send any
 CONNECTION_CLOSE frames in a 1-RTT packet.  Prior to connection establishment a
 peer might not have 1-RTT keys, so endpoints SHOULD send CONNECTION_CLOSE frames
-in a Handshake packet.  If the endpoint does not have Handshake keys, or it is
-not certain that the peer has Handshake keys, it MAY send CONNECTION_CLOSE
-frames in an Initial packet.  If multiple packets are sent, they can be
-coalesced (see {{packet-coalesce}}) to facilitate retransmission.
+in a Handshake packet.  If the endpoint does not have Handshake keys, it SHOULD
+send CONNECTION_CLOSE frames in an Initial packet.
+
+The server may not know whether the client has Handshake keys.  In order to
+guarantee a CONNECTION_CLOSE is processed, it SHOULD send a CONNECTION_CLOSE
+in both Handshake and Initial, because the client discards Initial keys as soon
+as it has Handshake keys. If multiple packets are sent, they can be coalesced
+(see {{packet-coalesce}}).

We'd also individually go crazy if we don't take it.  ūüėČ

-- 
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/2688#discussion_r283475603