IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: negotiating Packet Number Protection

Praveen Balasubramanian <pravb@microsoft.com> Fri, 07 September 2018 16:17 UTC

Return-Path: <pravb@microsoft.com>
X-Original-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8692130E1E for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Sep 2018 09:17:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.011
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.011 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=microsoft.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 bmidwljCs0Ww for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Sep 2018 09:17:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAM01-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-sn1nam01on0125.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.32.125]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12FB8130E1D for <quic@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Sep 2018 09:17:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=s3zE9nHbVleepJEEliZYb/JL2loWYciHtORgzPyq2DU=; b=lNNumNJkn1DZvcp4TCWZ8NuP9/vwQxhsvIE3tgti/oNyR9y+v9171Rw5MGfEWiPLuzW3aabyyIH3KeuxDpyX6DOPcV7LWFdhdIMcUas/pnFWtiai3VOKXuHAhJjitOBri5HcHetOn8VoWK5N3cvMiNXwQqNttORuDc5zvGN23vM=
Received: from MWHPR21MB0191.namprd21.prod.outlook.com (10.173.52.137) by MWHPR21MB0477.namprd21.prod.outlook.com (10.172.102.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1143.7; Fri, 7 Sep 2018 16:17:14 +0000
Received: from MWHPR21MB0191.namprd21.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1572:8fda:35b4:6231]) by MWHPR21MB0191.namprd21.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1572:8fda:35b4:6231%5]) with mapi id 15.20.1143.008; Fri, 7 Sep 2018 16:17:14 +0000
From: Praveen Balasubramanian <pravb@microsoft.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, "Gabriel.Montenegro=40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org" <Gabriel.Montenegro=40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
CC: QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: negotiating Packet Number Protection
Thread-Topic: negotiating Packet Number Protection
Thread-Index: AdRGNFtNHdOO+Z3gRiiFS3eOLSplqgACixwAACHM5bA=
Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2018 16:17:14 +0000
Message-ID: <MWHPR21MB0191429C8F82784C78DBC044B6000@MWHPR21MB0191.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
References: <DM5PR21MB01393FE7097A16C7A68EA7BE95010@DM5PR21MB0139.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <CABkgnnViOSQOYeEL4bL_hq6jPDaGR-G+O=A96C78+X4mheWaxg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnViOSQOYeEL4bL_hq6jPDaGR-G+O=A96C78+X4mheWaxg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [2001:4898:80e8:b:7dd0:4447:51b2:2abc]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; MWHPR21MB0477; 6:48Mv8NG0DHPyckJbUrWdcDppXdy8/CCbSacI+hOYpjDRRUnSqKkWAVgEU5a0NGeXL+bonhfOecfjLNcMcXcX8kE2XHB9a1EebPaEDJtgzFhPJNCzjLvvzBNMHKb3uh+WVz3aO6qqIwIe0ue3qRD8cViAOeWav3XggamZVgBJlOL3EP0wlUpJ0TsOwYWZrVlqhK0jxJWwAjNUIwe9ox9JmIuEX7mUbBmuEYgbye6AXdGWoHQoZyBVq+U//Kd6/LF7Pi/XVUH4dgxJaniFWQyy/1ndD4OVC/ccPvrhBXwK0c9nsNkQVOjDPdLiF0TRQ06A9l/e+RZJvb++Zh2cZjo6lIDsWEgfuWO4iMMu1dlqxYrxR9k35AVRl7z50HdKn4NuGp68CL9Jc1oFRNs1SX5PKYNkVCeIGVIQiA36CVNIBNgJcwvlsHbZdEOGf5bOONcJLGBHNO2y6mMfqx+TSJ3KMA==; 5:Wwbi97EZ7DPUIAHWbjNqLS/wE6iAsiKKSTrB56XHBb/s17ys7YAz82aWyAYPHkwLmcTrHFYU2EhbWe2/93lIY0IdUVAaKfougVbRUD94xX81akeKSSlGCi/ZTtU66016nYCyfk6gGGgb1KbSBM2Ohgwfk08FCkJHbyk7gVXhL84=; 7:+yuejNozMyK7RDwerM5+HX1eYFj6jx9KyboYonyV6TPQfEoOuSeibYug8zIeThFl3B7P9u2JAV9XG0EzDllYSpJX+Mh2bVHfY1LdgRerWcZGx1AiMF1UPaNxawxJ6npgtIOZySRKZ/ng8XYbXNukb3W5Eem7lCqRkrgW1/umrrfaaLYIZKz4dYmtkUqh7/+v9I27aoVzm/aKafHnlcWqClv3eedive63T627v6bCRUpaIT//cz/QdKedkUDPeyep
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SOS;
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: f172054c-537c-44b4-9f7f-08d614dd5fef
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652040)(8989137)(4534165)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990107)(5600074)(711020)(4618075)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:MWHPR21MB0477;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MWHPR21MB0477:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <MWHPR21MB0477C91D52E6943F68A29684B6000@MWHPR21MB0477.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(189930954265078)(219752817060721);
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(8211001083)(6040522)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3231344)(944501410)(52105095)(2018427008)(93006095)(93001095)(3002001)(10201501046)(6055026)(149027)(150027)(6041310)(201703131423095)(201702281528075)(20161123555045)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(20161123560045)(20161123562045)(20161123558120)(20161123564045)(201708071742011)(7699050)(76991033); SRVR:MWHPR21MB0477; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:MWHPR21MB0477;
x-forefront-prvs: 07880C4932
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(39860400002)(376002)(346002)(396003)(136003)(366004)(199004)(189003)(13464003)(8990500004)(966005)(486006)(39060400002)(5250100002)(476003)(446003)(11346002)(74316002)(6346003)(7736002)(53546011)(102836004)(3480700004)(305945005)(6246003)(68736007)(6506007)(22452003)(81156014)(81166006)(14444005)(46003)(97736004)(8936002)(33656002)(186003)(105586002)(2900100001)(256004)(110136005)(106356001)(76176011)(7696005)(2906002)(8676002)(316002)(6116002)(99286004)(4326008)(10290500003)(229853002)(6436002)(86362001)(478600001)(86612001)(55016002)(9686003)(6306002)(53936002)(14454004)(5660300001)(10090500001)(25786009); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:MWHPR21MB0477; H:MWHPR21MB0191.namprd21.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: microsoft.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=pravb@microsoft.com;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: UWrPlz9DX0YRg/HdMy1zIDM+4YgZgBSEN41aIpeygDB+eQQKAcIi6UapHNzvfukof98kXoMNKHbF70wJIUBVew7NOb+a5uVAMAS2ezX0uJYna+5gqs7VmtUjir4jZirLwxcPr03jwnozOSvbw2jSUILSPm7u5mwkpVDbCX15GQg5d4ilcVa1e+8KZdgU+g+dBqylphoKg24VgNNQ1Y+Rf6UPFykth8dU/aluHxgCErkCFgUgF0ySVZrAruLpLmNP3CvOvQfV7zWcFm3juioxRIo60E/MMLR+LYFLDuLQbvZkkPGaK13xUiCVbWTrTntx1QXd+QxsbfllzKxzIb+QLvzIpU7rRLZ4KBwaW/Sty1M=
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: f172054c-537c-44b4-9f7f-08d614dd5fef
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 07 Sep 2018 16:17:14.7990 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MWHPR21MB0477
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/1xwVcBnysDr3CH-pnNj9fGmAelE>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 07 Sep 2018 16:17:20 -0000

Since QUIC is a general purpose transport and not just for the HTTP2/Internet scenario, IMO this mechanism should ideally have been in the core transport RFC. We were asked to write up a separate draft. What's the purpose of a draft that won't be published :-)? Will we have to keep renewing it so it doesn’t expire? That seems burdensome process wise. This should either be an informational RFC or be subsumed into the core transport RFC.

-----Original Message-----
From: QUIC <quic-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Martin Thomson
Sent: Thursday, September 6, 2018 5:06 PM
To: Gabriel.Montenegro=40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org
Cc: QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: negotiating Packet Number Protection

This is an entirely appropriate use of transport parameters and it looks like the design works as intended.  I tend to think that the IETF doesn't need to publish this - this sort of extension is why we have relatively loose registration policies - but I'm happy to have that conversation at the appropriate time.
On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 8:55 AM Gabriel Montenegro <Gabriel.Montenegro=40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
>
>
> We just submitted a draft to negotiate Packet Number Protection. This would allow disabling it in environments (e.g., in a datacenter) where it may no be needed if both sides agree. Browsers, of course, would probably not bother with this.
>
>
>
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftools
> .ietf.org%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-montenegro-quic-negotiate-pnp-00&amp;data=02%
> 7C01%7Cpravb%40microsoft.com%7C482eb9e921cf4bd3bc4508d61455b743%7C72f9
> 88bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636718755725915944&amp;sdata=a3
> IhzBI%2BAC4tNSaz6nSQpDDF71JGpQE9jXSqPnHIp7A%3D&amp;reserved=0
>
>
>
> thanks,
>
>
>
> Gabriel, Nick, Praveen

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email