Re: [TLS] ECH-10 interop test server

Christopher Patton <cpatton@cloudflare.com> Wed, 07 April 2021 22:09 UTC

Return-Path: <cpatton@cloudflare.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4AEA3A2BA6 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 15:09:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cloudflare.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 eGnel7x3BaDe for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 15:09:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x732.google.com (mail-qk1-x732.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::732]) (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 5D8483A2BA4 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 15:09:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x732.google.com with SMTP id z10so189415qkz.13 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 07 Apr 2021 15:09:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cloudflare.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=d4aeFSK6qHhBO8cxR5QsKsxZGD7fPv84D+xAO+5EsmE=; b=we/zehbSwyYEsO/dE1DzfNZy0eyhrB3GD9nMhfMkCo0BqY7GB5PKA5ikgq24qqiu7C XvTYszqAMU3pt+pI6DUCxUR1/kZhyZpP8eJyi9e7at3L0zvfEVRX1gLPUGChfZDXvX6O s1lLfPnKohpGz0FIPLGbFZ/rX6fQGa+osfIJ8=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=d4aeFSK6qHhBO8cxR5QsKsxZGD7fPv84D+xAO+5EsmE=; b=QvKwo1+FJ4kFnos8WZrKaZnUYaYVUh5Dt6xJeMcsHyNgEI6yv0iRJrshFND1+lI+jd se2pBINnp32DeM07rhWEjRt2O5CM3v05Cor2npLUi2ntko6UgGeMBpv3DNKIWm064ipR VZThKcSvGsbJnhuA+hiVDHTr2HC2GZhpGsKcqBKrbfy3p5SNGfGti/3gHnRBwjfTZV/T 2wvbkElKF+tshW5oqSXSfLjTp+9xrI05gt0CbJrGlJZNtQwdhAtbeuNORV2GB3rU1ol2 J0w79Nl1jgiULYoapqfIP0npwjECm9gcRiULTMlTu6kfeklU76rgGo5HISYULWGSBcn6 rWEg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530EixGoJiFAUdwuxXTNn2m3/nG65hTbOO9ZPN2kXJYb1VCU4d7n RUfsn7qYDB2Jav/gV1/YC1DxEw2HpBT3QFo2Ch7FpQ9el+k=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyUlRNSYren9tpC7CP+3qhF+zNPHQQk6X66P30UrLE1II3H5Rbre9B1vJcMiW/4UzNyW24hWmpMw98SqSILmPc=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:1528:: with SMTP id n8mr5385627qkk.329.1617833373669; Wed, 07 Apr 2021 15:09:33 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAG2Zi23mtGwmpNSvUigOdph8y05MvWV_uGm8H0W=vbRFdZ6euw@mail.gmail.com> <0069a206-7ca9-e79c-42ae-f2c7633bcc7d@cs.tcd.ie> <05aa52f8-056d-9d68-28f0-b38513cf43ac@cs.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <05aa52f8-056d-9d68-28f0-b38513cf43ac@cs.tcd.ie>
From: Christopher Patton <cpatton@cloudflare.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2021 15:09:22 -0700
Message-ID: <CAG2Zi20WVBgAQiqjGTmcANsffOUyXypP3CdNozBrzd+4j764yA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Cc: "<tls@ietf.org>" <tls@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008b457505bf692f33"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/5of4NlUg47pxFIZ1Aovs_UIxcgc>
Subject: Re: [TLS] ECH-10 interop test server
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tls/>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2021 22:09:40 -0000

> (In case it helps someone else...) Is there any way that the
> HTTP response content could differ if ECH succeeded or not?
> I'm seeing the same 302 response in either case I think but
> maybe there's some specific pathname or something that'd
> result in different HTTP responses?
>

That's right, we're just redirecting most HTTP requests to the spec right
now.