Re: Unrecoverable loss pattern

Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen <mikkelfj@gmail.com> Mon, 05 March 2018 20:30 UTC

Return-Path: <mikkelfj@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE8ED12DA6D for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 12:30:35 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1520281836; bh=lskxtSqEeIzY91dwZ1FHwTEFySy1dRmep5Zm++b0nRQ=; h=From:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Subject:To:Cc:Cc:Cc:Cc; b=JDMQJXVG8VZOh7KHwkPgXT2M5Jt//NUkEo1N7hRyQ2Mee1Tc7ekb/loKKExI+x/kt nU6R5U30wMYrRPJrFiCBkqgUKu8X4KUUiGnrV9FVY0FtRtGInl/rtjoxvSLVm1i87G coMIoNcTm9iURQfsemP4eplMUfXZy66eL2dFvKFU=
X-Mailbox-Line: From mikkelfj@gmail.com Mon Mar 5 12:30:35 2018
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7D0A12D77D; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 12:30:35 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1520281835; bh=lskxtSqEeIzY91dwZ1FHwTEFySy1dRmep5Zm++b0nRQ=; h=From:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Subject:To:Cc:Cc:Cc:Cc; b=mP9WQR9QOEc8bEqjff61HRWyTMjbN69IsTKEVumZhHqcYtptXlf4irnWK5XtX97PA zcZ6Fq+aJ7Iyf94iA2NQnDLXgOHFgyIotKQ6zmO90jBs7uIXh0q/WFRTe8ScRfdN1a 17OzwaxuiZzuKHkytupqu0t/VnKNRAu2wxfwCzDk=
X-Original-To: dmarc-reverse@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dmarc-reverse@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D4131204DA for <dmarc-reverse@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 12:30:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.698
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 vaWCombCCC34 for <dmarc-reverse@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 12:30:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io0-x22c.google.com (mail-io0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22c]) (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 6862512D77D for <ianswett=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 12:30:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-io0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id h23so19421717iob.11 for <ianswett=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>; Mon, 05 Mar 2018 12:30:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=YFxhx5KNVaw3OlwMtKJ6mXminlFNovb9Jk/0bmfGElE=; b=NPOB8AMmvJw5+FQjwrnbDRYXyrD39/BEIZGDAYZ6CKhv7ynRnduARdSz4tEf1nEA2/ JsT8vq4ZWzsX63I4LwAwm1lGOfj/26D9ZEPB09IwflAKYGifzF8P7V7j/ojuUUQg+TxA 8g+5TPjPM9GgSfdfDubrtlMrAudZQZRNyOS4sWR50MJ21TdN+NT+SoWO+LHI0+aTluue SqYXVh6wyMXRAyWWOHmplTci1HOXaBFQ7MI9huJ7K3e3DHcx3FoEAkAoxjK409VzrXmT 650pkJ11T9HOoJRORQoRq06wg01rINTudK8OApKxYPoTy52OqbO7WbBw/h2i8CBCNMVk +vmg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=YFxhx5KNVaw3OlwMtKJ6mXminlFNovb9Jk/0bmfGElE=; b=inxJTJv9gmSVZqwRyD0mB9lVRjdwvIS54Ai4ozhnAKh5+q+I4jFfnCvDP+B6m1RmvX Se1Q35G2ePr9qrJNdC8IekQjF4wTWYr/OB7+FBKlXxQh+IUf+aq+xylcuQhVbhKj7oHl Xvar1JtjeSiAjkUjXzQxDV0Uz6mhLlgt1X/eq0jj2eQHnd4K9zydIGmY2pWavlrp0Ynj TEyFf+QF0vLbjbzfeX4mBWtAeArAbCuOUAS13g2vAo0JX/TRdShf59RJfwMpvfb6vWD/ jMEJjUeVCBXxWKDrrCrncLhJ8jmWrxI1nvKsMNhVlZhGQC3DfCdfAHPxpXthqDX+v0oI 9PLg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7GcqHQhAD/18jTFQU3PqbEe3J0jKJmd96WBgoKNaRIhf1sNwjon 9MwhAv3MxI4Uxi6nQ0fsCmFY0XTrCcvkmdxmGV8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELtp2YJZwGhX2neUZFl817YTXlCjWNAP/Yh1krIH1/UlJTnmiRugqSMIzt7yn7W2KwAeUcRawuJuhlSXWVv51Eo=
X-Received: by 10.107.39.145 with SMTP id n139mr19835518ion.165.1520281832797; Mon, 05 Mar 2018 12:30:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 12:30:31 -0800
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Mikkel_Fahn=C3=B8e_J=C3=B8rgensen?= <mikkelfj@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKcm_gOYvToz_PuXN6+g4VZ-iHVf1pT=_LpQi-h-6wab7QN92A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOYVs2q1QSpvZjPRfbJmKhhQ6eApwLSSFSbbOBt2J-PAeqVELQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnWuXJb2_BcfU4N=ODwy5JDZKBBd6TyhFmXLbPgVrvCoEA@mail.gmail.com> <CAOYVs2q0q6YrFfipd7UEENoz2ht2Mr0fPqnvy5pJRz-bPxCJpw@mail.gmail.com> <059bc7c6-a8cb-c46b-c971-333b9051c222@huitema.net> <CAOYVs2ogy77tjE+e9_mj6YNYcsDP0iduUKsE-_JnMrOeo4jVbQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnVLdKiaEDdGKjLXB9wNZ8vxvV_ZyJQnLAR4VxsjUDvjyg@mail.gmail.com> <f62726b4-564a-4e45-726b-63705753ddf2@huitema.net> <CABkgnnU78mE55N9KHx2FqR6AvthyM86-+zG-VknQ3tfpeKh=Gw@mail.gmail.com> <9d646ca7-2c95-62fd-206f-10ec6ce4cd5d@huitema.net> <CAKcm_gOb_ZYD3bWZVq5y0O50jwnh98xME7p_tgY-TCNSZRkGfg@mail.gmail.com> <CAN1APdcrzJ+q5SnVAFF8xEjstG5OfejrcLe-vb5c2-aHKkPFAQ@mail.gmail.com> <c030fc96-0ce6-bc80-b9b3-4f3bd9df305f@huitema.net> <CAKcm_gOYvToz_PuXN6+g4VZ-iHVf1pT=_LpQi-h-6wab7QN92A@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Airmail (420)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 12:30:31 -0800
Message-ID: <CAN1APdfY9yizUN5WYOy0dLk0-rEuqEOXTHepx6FwDPW9Rz4YAQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Unrecoverable loss pattern
To: Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com>, Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1140444a9a402e0566b0329c"
Cc: IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
Cc: Marten Seemann <martenseemann@gmail.com>
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: ianswett@google.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/5IUgpjf_NJsjgKjIhxM9LGaGRDw>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Main mailing list of the IETF QUIC working group <quic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 20:30:36 -0000

Yes, I was having the same thought recently - that stream 0’s non-flow
control ought to end along with the stream itself. That naturally begs for
a different post handshake crypto stream, but in this case linearity is
guaranteed because you simply wait for stream 0 to end.

End of stream 0 thus signals handshake termination, and it avoids
accidentally processing a frame with the wrong crypto level.

In the more general case it is not so clearcut because you don’t want to
change streams when you change paths, even if there are some flow control
aspects that are appealing. But this can wait until multi-path becomes more
clear and also ties in with packet number visibility, to a degree.

On 5 March 2018 at 21.08.55, Ian Swett (ianswett@google.com) wrote:

I was thinking that you'd designate a different stream as the
post-handshake encrypted crypto stream and stream 0 would become the
unencrypted crypto stream.  Possibly that stream would be subject to flow
control, and we could not subject stream 0 to flow control, which may be
simpler than the current flow control arrangement?  Or possibly that causes
more problems than it solves, since TLS is designed as a single stream.