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

Jeremy Harris <jgh@wizmail.org> Mon, 01 August 2016 11:20 UTC

Return-Path: <jgh@wizmail.org>
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 562F412D73C for <tcpinc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 04:20:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.187
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.187 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 vs2Lp28zF--r for <tcpinc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 04:20:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wizmail.org (wizmail.org [IPv6:2a00:1940:107::2:0:0]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D319C12D73B for <tcpinc@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 04:20:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [2a00:b900:109e:0:3e97:eff:feb2:e128] (helo=lap.dom.ain) by wizmail.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87_RC110) id 1bUBH5-0003YR-CX for tcpinc@ietf.org (return-path <jgh@wizmail.org>); Mon, 01 Aug 2016 11:20:47 +0000
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> <579BA470.3000405@isi.edu> <CAJU8_nXjhHH1eEXPA3hvhJ3YXsP_v2djGX=X2p9+wyn767Hm5A@mail.gmail.com> <adcaa33a-3bf5-e63a-bd19-fd165b16aa7d@wizmail.org> <87oa5fniu0.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> <9ff12fb6-44f9-b1d0-2e9d-a67683679037@wizmail.org> <CAJU8_nVBem40i5Rqke37UBtOquF_mVBJHkjrtAmNN2qPdHqY=A@mail.gmail.com> <87d1lunvhn.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> <579E9248.7050006@isi.edu> <87popt6nci.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> <87k2g16mvb.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> <87y44hc549.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu>
From: Jeremy Harris <jgh@wizmail.org>
Message-ID: <53b313cc-d9e2-3bca-930f-1c27ffbd2970@wizmail.org>
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2016 12:20:44 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <87y44hc549.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Pcms-Received-Sender: [2a00:b900:109e:0:3e97:eff:feb2:e128] (helo=lap.dom.ain) with esmtpsa
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpinc/lcg0WWvT89mD96XCtiuqNoYYKmQ>
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: Mon, 01 Aug 2016 11:20:51 -0000

On 01/08/16 08:36, David Mazieres wrote:
> 4.7.  Data in SYN segments
[...]
>    A host implementing ENO, even if ENO has been disabled by
>    configuration, MUST discard the data in a received SYN+ENO segment if
>    any of the following applies:
[...]
>    A host MUST NOT acknowledge the sequence number of any discarded SYN
>    data, but rather MUST acknowledge the other host's initial sequence
>    number as if the received SYN segment contained no data.
>    Furthermore, a host MUST NOT assume discarded SYN data will be
>    identically retransmitted.  If later non-SYN segments contain
>    different data for the same sequence numbers as SYN data, the host
>    MUST process only data from non-SYN segments.

Nit: the last two sentences could be read as specifying behaviour
for discarded SYN data even for either non-SYN+ENO segments or
for non-ENO-implementing hosts.  I don't think those should be
covered.

Otherwise, I think I'm happy.
-- 
Jeremy