IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: ALPN negotiation (was Re: Add extension work to Interop matrix)

Dmitri Tikhonov <dtikhonov@litespeedtech.com> Tue, 07 January 2020 19:45 UTC

Return-Path: <dtikhonov@litespeedtech.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 D50FA120113 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 11:45:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=litespeedtech-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 65RmgbT6-oAd for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 11:45:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qv1-xf2f.google.com (mail-qv1-xf2f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f2f]) (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 4528512010E for <quic@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 11:45:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qv1-xf2f.google.com with SMTP id l14so372795qvu.12 for <quic@ietf.org>; Tue, 07 Jan 2020 11:45:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=litespeedtech-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=EeaoiklB4POWpP3jQC7O5SHEYjX3VO/CrGednmPGYcs=; b=jrbE3mQGy1DxAf/m+zeGZI4PY0ooTAODvrN5R1rZNO5rU3bJ95yWJmKbZtr7HU1k3E 6OSV7zT5Y+BZUWtE/z6eGCgU8MsQr9FLcVUMh8cwQJxe/ksMYPS0x5rqCh7WT3CQl0j5 JJOoTMlwRuaiKyV0hjzyWEY8uw9X0qJJjuoNTBKOSg39I3UA3kSCF+nU9TCAHiFDoIqt SfBkbWX3qnmVX3bR80SHBgJtsyg4A/Paga/uEhEx85hq7IxsqH4Ww5d2zEKeQmqc0BwQ eN3SlwPypoBfM5yWXT8sonrBcTQIVXJXioQdSpnrIS3lQAtxKrBU7D2yDn2Dgyis4OYd RikA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=EeaoiklB4POWpP3jQC7O5SHEYjX3VO/CrGednmPGYcs=; b=kHQJYmN/JXFcnCEWZejb5jQFUTxrpTZVo0kJ3Bj8oSdt5e/B6Lv/5X4ZwYOMpBzBUz 2tf1wK3BtEsODJv3+SM7RZq1Mu2oMJt29KIonC/0YPoz20i9G9WCQO8y3wCERcjYH6oi 0wDPj0MW3CRitfsOCbsVPsTn4XVr5tKmmEcOl2j2Df0kGE3XP1rD5rBAjcB8E6WqoTou o+7ZeB+QxRYU0H5U+h/IuucvZ7D+JCKW8Pi1CcM+wLoRUqEXgJcqO+bYslXwVnauLvEb mlsYv/tl4EudrYwErpZlGnHy48WtNSsXMvlCzjnPFfG8iFP0EDYIjRQh15oaOpuPXtfl /ZAA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX3mfijoR5AjHMi0uZMOStfJbff9/ZgCd/jtwD8t6kIhagrKjj8 v8obqufIEeBIBw00ZO6AahH/BFR+6gw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyRxwgJRylXQUCNXiNNSUdllEMUS0s0YH/Bye+utl84X8UzO9NOKkiiTkcVraOQBA/LTBAaAA==
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:444a:: with SMTP id l10mr1048121qvt.194.1578426346438; Tue, 07 Jan 2020 11:45:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ubuntu-dmitri (ool-2f1636b6.static.optonline.net. [47.22.54.182]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 201sm301544qkf.10.2020.01.07.11.45.45 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 07 Jan 2020 11:45:46 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2020 14:45:44 -0500
From: Dmitri Tikhonov <dtikhonov@litespeedtech.com>
To: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
Cc: IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: ALPN negotiation (was Re: Add extension work to Interop matrix)
Message-ID: <20200107194543.GK14229@ubuntu-dmitri>
Mail-Followup-To: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>, IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
References: <20200107143114.GC14229@ubuntu-dmitri> <d27fc30c-7f51-85f3-4bb1-e7b7b500ac72@huitema.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <d27fc30c-7f51-85f3-4bb1-e7b7b500ac72@huitema.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/oHbjWvk2lKbq_DSyf6y-9jKFuAk>
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: Tue, 07 Jan 2020 19:45:49 -0000

On Tue, Jan 07, 2020 at 09:06:49AM -1000, Christian Huitema wrote:
> It seems that ALPN negotiation is going to be a practical requirement
> going forward. Not so much for negotiating H09 versus H3, we can expect
> H09 to fade away at some point. But we will have to negotiate h3-24 vs
> h3-25 and similar transitions for a good bit of time, and then we will
> probably move to h4-00, h4-01, etc. So maybe we should start testing that.

I would be for it.  Is the testing as simple as

    1. Client sends (h3-X, h3-Y), server responds with h3-X; and
    2. Client sends (h3-Y, h3-X), server responds with h3-Y?

Of course, this assumes that the server support both h3-X and h3-Y.
For example, supporting drafts 23 and 24 at the same time was easy;
24 and 25 might not be as easy.

  - Dmitri.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email