Re: [tcpinc] TCP's treatment of data in SYN packets

Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com> Fri, 29 July 2016 19:18 UTC

Return-Path: <wes@mti-systems.com>
X-Original-To: tcpinc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpinc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2536D12D1A4 for <tcpinc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 12:18:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mti-systems-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 F0kLl-M3uRjm for <tcpinc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 12:18:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-x22c.google.com (mail-it0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22c]) (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 9936812D108 for <tcpinc@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 12:18:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id j124so118157351ith.1 for <tcpinc@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 12:18:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mti-systems-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=eL7trozk4+N6qzBXqwJwj6gUWQiNNmZS6hTBh8NTUTw=; b=WZxeERHdZJHkLow5txA39qUkYn23n70Cp5eA2B8wYNXUSI3qpPBF3F4HtiBq4/ltWn ZokkFk4LlGgMw2U0pm38G8JI7fyJ729sxSQ4ixueYqUbj7quIV7fO17qO7Q9T2Bmf7Bm 1AB7ni0/dp6WPR3B3/YCtaUPeE/R/8OP2SGOrOYPQGOA91mgZSeugRolXoFlISQ8yiTZ oQQHUAjJDL10uSRiGK0NmdfISwDlQLEGCUmIFHQrovSHT2lmgdtePM5nHDgjY4QksZv8 IKKInuWgwyVAfEeWWKJEDcTW6IRTQtY0JU+LP/fzIGBmBu4QAg/JNTDQLytXBJGCmnXw SsrA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=eL7trozk4+N6qzBXqwJwj6gUWQiNNmZS6hTBh8NTUTw=; b=bzFTl0khfWOIaw+aGRwzusG8Tu3Aax7ZEfHTd31JjBl4FXzkbEaKb0XSyJdE8jrh2f IqumNRNi9gw0KqIfDvHTvegFhpe9A8iWYDd2lqgiYAc5MmEgLoPkg2v6hqTiY94X8+Wt t5ffr2MjuNWcm6p/yim0hLWnH/OauZVFvosav2NVUZjFO9gqCCBhs+RikuJJ1PKXFeNa gwlluC8oZmozN7f8KgGM04WRRlKogrvkclFRRu+XHNc4dC8ayflmsHq9fpuyPNp9gal0 l/xV0GioIFD84pCRnSewVQKLk+edFo1kIiXzaxFWzLCuCp4t2sGcnWl0TBj3muEEmz4U RJ+g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkooutvVgGkehO1JIeucvEY/z7kdAQ2m1cK0IoOzizPRwgOxWFZVPSMFCXludIfx0548w==
X-Received: by 10.36.67.13 with SMTP id s13mr48244566itb.90.1469819900705; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 12:18:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.104] (cpe-76-188-215-129.neo.res.rr.com. [76.188.215.129]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x6sm1276024ite.0.2016.07.29.12.18.19 for <tcpinc@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 29 Jul 2016 12:18:20 -0700 (PDT)
To: tcpinc@ietf.org
References: <CAJU8_nU1WzQNFFUn_2o1cACutB01iyQ_hC29PHoutr8TRDKGnA@mail.gmail.com> <579A4669.7030600@isi.edu> <87lh0lselg.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> <CAJU8_nUPrm9JJMrrMbL5+FpP-9CKC6EkidCry9UuZA5ZfyJtoA@mail.gmail.com> <579A8223.8050308@isi.edu> <CAJU8_nXSxr7ykC1TwptBmyP8pNccz52ozq=hF7-EYiaMdDeLBQ@mail.gmail.com> <8737mtqkf5.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> <579BA4C5.2040004@isi.edu>
From: Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com>
Message-ID: <5459b95c-0932-0af0-13f8-ad2c703806c4@mti-systems.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2016 15:18:15 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <579BA4C5.2040004@isi.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpinc/W7KewA3ubqE5t-exuxUotan7if8>
Subject: Re: [tcpinc] TCP's treatment of data in SYN packets
X-BeenThere: tcpinc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for adding encryption to TCP." <tcpinc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpinc>, <mailto:tcpinc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tcpinc/>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpinc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpinc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc>, <mailto:tcpinc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2016 19:18:23 -0000

On 7/29/2016 2:47 PM, Joe Touch wrote:
> FWIW, IMO the best wording would:
>
> - start with the simplest case, i.e., NOT trying to optimize EDO to use
> SYN data
>
> - present the use of SYN data with EDO as an optimization
>          that optimization might be a MAY or SHOULD, but not a MUST
>
> Otherwise, you're needlessly complicating your spec for an optimization.
>

Just to be clear, this is actually talking about ENO, and not EDO, 
correct?  (I'm assuming a repeated typo in your message)

SYN data with EDO does not need any special discussion, because EDO only 
alters DO semantics for later (non-SYN) segments.  So, how a stack deals 
with data on SYN is un-related to EDO (but more critical for ENO).