IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Closing on CONNECTION_CLOSE

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Thu, 27 July 2017 14:57 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.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 98F75132186 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 07:57:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 TzmfMplIL9iM for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 07:57:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw0-x232.google.com (mail-yw0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::232]) (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 F255F132036 for <quic@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 07:57:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yw0-x232.google.com with SMTP id i6so73961271ywb.1 for <quic@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 07:57:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=sRc7eFt8vNvbFexXmcYDOAqcIKu4FZKql7XM2MU7ZmM=; b=nXSWkAA8wb5Aa/8Rzu1+g7dXIL0Hks0DBKtWWfKb/qU90uFeB5CMHDJdXQYpGRnmgw phxB9+vontobVdRoqjIc3tpU9OOJsfgBfLPXFr/now3rxw2hxr8rfYFziAgXP4gfEIo3 mQVXB6xy9Ew3sjEsp+vNQF/Pbk+BbCh/f7s/Yndvu39jg4iWBUu6L+Ejnr1mcoI9M/7k /XPYo48g8selaBE5umMONVVNhizJA6sqeIwcatnD1CPXA6BhebbAnQ892H/shI8GkknJ QteBsmYKz9XyRiDHIeG4TvYHeauo9vjzkjwfzQAYrRUXxvdNyCFE+I56lSTCtHnCWUeW zpKQ==
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=sRc7eFt8vNvbFexXmcYDOAqcIKu4FZKql7XM2MU7ZmM=; b=HYipuabFmrGTkoQG+RZBFNSz5I4oLp/TPqav1bzPADpjcvHziVFv644Dbshw68AV+C kcSj/73eHhX+8T7n+2TZpNmaixcPp+5q7kRY9c7v1P/+7nwCmAc4Uqk8goHWfRvg81x6 8eVwVinV4qc1lpCy3nTYlBVPYYgsNvbbY6s0CWE2StpRhxcXfTrSiFypxwKjYVH3A+/a lrWbJ5Jv8yqsQWQ385oJ0NsJswjKgTIHSmbMLHVtgqAxMEeJjsFmC7WIDUxsSqVIZKxp hWa694X4YWX41ElhlRgN1peFCxmxW/Di7tYRIneTJPy+rJN1Oq2GTxqmp/wBNQZmgn6/ ZetQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw1121gKVp8QImX6NVqToYRrNRHosurFBhTy23OnyCvPNNNuOZUzxZ ITFVbL25KHJmU0minRWmorw1ItVTOH27
X-Received: by 10.37.42.15 with SMTP id q15mr3745763ybq.204.1501167436099; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 07:57:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.129.36.12 with HTTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 07:56:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAKcm_gOSSWOiY7S3KCW4674KO76PxoFmcTbFSsbO-71aQmCXHg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABcZeBP_Xh1QC9Qxhy5HYiMiTfknPs7Yp7+X_KnQE1O-juxJ5g@mail.gmail.com> <cb7caadd-73bd-6505-7a57-4b0271fb66d2@huitema.net> <DB5PR07MB1237960D04442972441D9B8B84BE0@DB5PR07MB1237.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <CAKcm_gOSSWOiY7S3KCW4674KO76PxoFmcTbFSsbO-71aQmCXHg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 07:56:35 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBP3s=XrOXjzN=SvjrYkc-eSUAx8BZXTO-BFAQW-55TXzw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Closing on CONNECTION_CLOSE
To: Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com>
Cc: "Swindells, Thomas (Nokia - GB/Cambridge, UK)" <thomas.swindells@nokia.com>, "quic@ietf.org" <quic@ietf.org>, Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1144191ec718f205554dc736"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/gdtbKy9RWHQn1Ymdlx0fxw4FuTg>
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: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 14:57:46 -0000

I just filed a PR for this at:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/705

It explicitly permits duplication.

-Ekr


On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 7:51 AM, Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com> wrote:

> I would recommend sending an identical packet every time, since there's no
> value to encrypting a new one with a new packet number, but it increases
> the amount of state you have to keep and the CPU to respond to spurious
> packets.
>
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Swindells, Thomas (Nokia - GB/Cambridge,
> UK) <thomas.swindells@nokia.com> wrote:
>
>> > > However, this isn't that big a deal, because as
>> > > noted above, you can throw away the connection and just send a stored
>> > > packet, or alternately, just send public reset (or just go silent).
>> Should/would you have to generate a newly encrypted packet with a new
>> packet number each time (as per other retransmissions)?
>> Or is this a special case because it is the final packet and so doesn't
>> matter if it is duplicated?
>>
>>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email