Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO probes are sent too frequently (#3546)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Fri, 27 March 2020 10:56 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 E38C33A0A44 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 03:56:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.482
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.482 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, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, 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 C61ACOzKNYmJ for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 03:56:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-20.smtp.github.com (out-20.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.203]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E78323A0A3D for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 03:56:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-a6a2749.va3-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-a6a2749.va3-iad.github.net [10.48.16.62]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C61CF8C003D for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 03:56:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1585306588; bh=khm304EbFwc9Nt3MF5mw7jALQDg7S6VbR0imGPpwFLo=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=DwiSVQXr79SwXbLFp8FuATWxyC4eCo7vJWCvO0ka3YyO43/SirMv3+wUt+D9yzIrj 3SjHu35Sah4ySbCGuYAbo0XpBiDIj8m5FsjCbE8nNGYOM+lasf71coCCAtR8f6V7xt gR/kEXctVBCJlntlThLOJKidijH4A7ClzBvAjvmY=
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 03:56:28 -0700
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK52YYSG6MF4RM6HKFF4RG6NZEVBNHHCGDM7NY@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3546/604937626@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3546@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3546@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] PTO probes are sent too frequently (#3546)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e7ddbdcb6cca_58003fb78eacd96c70617"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ianswett
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/yYKvF2k5TWvIn0egOAhLpjyUatg>
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, 27 Mar 2020 10:56:32 -0000

I think the most intellectually clean thing to do here would be to not reset PTO count when an ACK is received and the PTO is only armed for anti-amplification purposes.  This is because even though at a transport level, everything is working(ACKs are quickly received), the client is arming the PTO for a very different reason(anti-deadlock).  And the PTO packets aren't allowing the server to make any more progress, because it's not blocked.

But I don't think that suggestion is very easy to implement, so I'm not sure it's what we want.

I'd suggest restricting the client to one anti-deadlock packet per second or some arbitrary period, which would be easier, but means someone has to pick a magic number.  I mention 1 second because it's a magic number already in QUIC recovery(default handshake timeout) and in TCP.  This basically amounts to anti-anti-amplification attack prevention I think :(

-- 
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/3546#issuecomment-604937626