Re: Long Headers and Version Negotiation

Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com> Mon, 08 January 2018 03:57 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.h.duke@gmail.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 880AE126D74 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Jan 2018 19:57:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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 inxW4qtU6Usl for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Jan 2018 19:57:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wr0-x22b.google.com (mail-wr0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::22b]) (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 3A7971200C1 for <quic@ietf.org>; Sun, 7 Jan 2018 19:57:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wr0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id 36so9350389wrh.1 for <quic@ietf.org>; Sun, 07 Jan 2018 19:57:14 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Ldj5bJ+c8w9QS99pgYE4SBEQKvU1aw29qWzXKfHdZQQ=; b=igt4ZUr905BqQNmknTqICjEU93RL0FjA772GSCXv1Tk76XN8VG+Tc4cdAVQzSSbynY g0a2crS3yExA3QEqeDIQJJTdZdbQH2ZGbDwy/8++2joBNc4uG3U4A7vfQd4kX4vkgF1T jGih4d217zUc9/bzK6UN6K7djZi9gGpnj0P8xSH4PAxu2ltsdUdRRLyh9zc2jmCrJTor SQd5PtXxWGV2nEUfZwPN23xPhdMSeyHVS4Ubi2uwtAGzbA969zvipzqNmXCFcXhQPdHl GdMXKkvcD6dGhvFbHzFG6jnKa9b1SH6SEsF/U2RAH9smoS7lUyy1W+KLlxAy3bZrshJW /Hgg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Ldj5bJ+c8w9QS99pgYE4SBEQKvU1aw29qWzXKfHdZQQ=; b=sJg4xC2+OteNxO+DBubCtOYs7QFvfBMfn8SIOU8CcS3OgYSMpRbDSHiWPGk6A5vwoW Z2I5oRqIJzDBytxaIkLf5stQONYQ5j/NIadgee7oLc2Z/hr8oAbAKHmCvzA4W3R+7JIT l0J3fzJmy4AoUKZl2fuCUvOs3Oqiv6OhPs3UuOfGildKIudD1Fi6Vi3Z2f2aIwhxKOpZ 7roHVRKMjWYn3fyLYrRHZwD4sDLfXm1i56d7aQKWUBHxHyteGx1vDd/FkrMAOzS+xZPh Tf7PX58/FZx2UpLlilbo8rH6+f6ob04MtvkQmNlUip6wswLUKOTTvOF4ZpuNhY2ZNxEz ll1Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mKzQj8A+m2xU0UFw8QvwxBytrYbLaCJPXmXycYGa6xIMIPJX4jM SYB1HMZsgbg0rW//Cgyhhjz5JqAXIUQSKbrFWUE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBovj8PRCbgmo9GklkXl14G+p9qYXS+C/5YRukEx3hbLb7VoCzjM++tRo9yTEK+TnuJEJFPQo8rD6GFUs8bQi/u8=
X-Received: by 10.223.147.71 with SMTP id 65mr10088168wro.155.1515383832751; Sun, 07 Jan 2018 19:57:12 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.128.1 with HTTP; Sun, 7 Jan 2018 19:57:12 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <E389B9E7-C716-4963-8E2B-1E4C86F3D7B8@huitema.net>
References: <CAM4esxRroE5rOXEHgqJ-_5Vdm-=odN7VmWBweKQgTnT5pU87XA@mail.gmail.com> <BN6PR21MB01788D37BFE5700EB00F392AB31C0@BN6PR21MB0178.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <CABkgnnWUqv2Y2UCaq6EF1cBBKiAzgvua-KQzobPMVHZBcpXvXw@mail.gmail.com> <CAM4esxQzrvwBwFr5tTk9ni+-gEs7xzXvzHp1ADy847w4SrNTwQ@mail.gmail.com> <FB5E9997-E32A-4506-A76D-4AA4F4EFB34D@huitema.net> <CABkgnnUj2rz5t_6tcdoORAtaxZqNb6O3_onPWAoQDxHoRJuxVw@mail.gmail.com> <E389B9E7-C716-4963-8E2B-1E4C86F3D7B8@huitema.net>
From: Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 19:57:12 -0800
Message-ID: <CAM4esxTsmgjdh-Zvk2e-4no4e27_y=0YC8QuDfAGQjGMoYuZgg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Long Headers and Version Negotiation
To: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Nick Banks <nibanks@microsoft.com>, IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c0d29100cb30105623bcb50"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/DJaqyB_TtR3jTnU-SNmwtPSDKEA>
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, 08 Jan 2018 03:57:16 -0000

I filed issue 1038
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1038


On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 7:49 PM, Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
wrote:

>
>
> > On Jan 7, 2018, at 5:32 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 2:12 PM, Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
> wrote:
> >> About 0xFF invariant -- that was one of the issues we found during the
> >> December 18 interop. The first byte in the VN packet is unspecified so
> >> picoquic was setting it to 0xFF. Legit, but somewhat unexpected.
> >
> > That's why we have these interop things.  The question is whether it
> > is surprising enough to warrant a change.
>
> Eh eh...
> >
> >> Another point about VN storms. Servers can of course implement some
> kind of
> >> pacing. They should also only send VN in response to packets that are at
> >> least 1200 bytes, since CI must be at least that.
> >
> > From Section 7.1:
> >
> > For servers, packets that aren’t associated with a connection
> > potentially create a new connection. However, only packets that use
> > the long packet header and that are at least the minimum size defined
> > for the protocol version can be initial packets.
>
> So if we just suggested that 0-RTT packets should be shorter than the
> minimum size, we would be covered.
>