Re: Quic: the Elephant in the Room

Michael Thomas <> Mon, 19 April 2021 21:46 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 468463A458F for <>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 14:46:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.149
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.149 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pXr3WqNqy-Ub for <>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 14:46:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::634]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A71FD3A458B for <>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 14:46:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id t22so18189045ply.1 for <>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 14:46:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=fluffulence; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=AlYR3JKgCz7SwJaEweMx5DPaBdJAjMzyEvDNHLlPUtM=; b=DWy0OyyXXjUG9vmR2cFA9Oua4cXTYiB6v5Z92H6McovNaW91M/cgvDby4Oq/jpf3c+ 8PbJo75c7o3/GkFUj5x9AyPmklX+HtIv7PPYbcy4UZMxd8GZvBpjyZcJhaL/qhea6NtB MPLzJGUH9jOxRoB032stPj03A2CePkkLLQj7dnWzbWamwFTWZDgPx0c0Vd589nBQW8HZ EQRw3d4NWx7gYJZRJzydTwM4yakyIeW1xk07/uZ62MCGuxXaUMg8YSm7qNn3LWfdViiG UeUpthI7QMrRmWORGJPLf22Bvl1937PngIbPJgDx5Jfau6Y2TNKZwWtd+7c7RKYN4jQX BUHA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=AlYR3JKgCz7SwJaEweMx5DPaBdJAjMzyEvDNHLlPUtM=; b=mRqSKn46ABk4SKAQO3QpkPTIIQvoh9BhysPxLZgJ01VEG5asypFLFat+C7lZV7Pr6i JtsZisO4JoPtHssELeUOPGGcHk+YV//5JRUXriHfTAn3nKqqXh1xkj+qaRIs5uFTDdlt QIbb8KtEiXcsdGVtQRCc6Y51tZ79MVX8eCAKWtgmCW7Pi7fyycITOkUNVmXxUe43cHkC h4ftYbbgBYr7z2R0giJNraHXUbgRCcRocqkmxSGvt2uoobZHSGc2P2tkzDvw2vKUzY9k PHtfKgP9DPIzsj+UGJQUcQO7tAvpKmNfULn6Z2CJHOgZjN9MRU6+H4W6NdKB4VKYOBIS 63lQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5327+6xqx1Z20QkDtCbKgyXmsbJyyO6u+RTBth51sC27VUG1qYjI MCCTHeZnmFhFz6tv7mVcYM9veiEnjjuNGg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyl1ZaotFPve7S403s9itIDD8+hHieg9AchhXRHpXXtZq6SwsIys7qrw15CwUMxeNk3/B5Ceg==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8505:b029:ec:b451:71cd with SMTP id bj5-20020a1709028505b02900ecb45171cdmr1640708plb.23.1618868769720; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 14:46:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mike-mac.lan ( []) by with ESMTPSA id w75sm13979963pfc.135.2021. (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 19 Apr 2021 14:46:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Quic: the Elephant in the Room
To: Matt Joras <>, Paul Vixie <>
References: <> <> <> <>
From: Michael Thomas <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2021 14:46:08 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Main mailing list of the IETF QUIC working group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2021 21:46:16 -0000

On 4/19/21 2:32 PM, Matt Joras wrote:
> Hi Paul,
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 2:13 PM Paul Vixie <> wrote:
>> hello. can you explain how you get from:
>> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 01:45:48PM -0700, Matt Joras wrote:
>>> ... The
>>> vast majority of QUIC connections in our deployment (and TCP + TLS for
>>> that matter) are resumed.
>> to:
>>> ... Resumption makes
>>> this particular concern a non-issue for most real world connections
>>> and has other positive benefits.
>> that is, how is your deployment known to represent most real world use?
> There was implied context to those statements. In Mike's blog post and
> subsequent emails it is clear he's talking about typical Internet
> browser-like use cases, which is why he suggests someone "Google-like"
> might benefit from this sort of system to reduce the amount of data
> transferred during the handshake. I am referring to the same class of
> usage when I say "most real world connections". Perhaps I should have
> qualified more but I figured that was implicit.
To put a fine point on it, I'm saying a Google-like company is in the 
position to run an *experiment* just like they did for Quic. Apparently 
Chrome at one point supported DANE but Google didn't do the obvious and 
support it server side so they could find out whether it could make a 
difference or not. They took it out when predictably nobody supported it.