Re: [TLS] [DTLS1.3]About the retransmission of Handshake records

[Xuan k <[e-mail]>]

Hi Ben,

Thanks for your reply. But we understand may not be the same.

Since ACK messages are not retransmitted, I think they should not consume
message_seqs.
If an ACK really use a message_seq and it is lost in network, new handshake
records will
always use a larger message_seq than the peer expected (next_receive_seq).
The peer will unable to continue the handshake process.

And I think the ServerHello in the figure should start with 1, as the
figure shows.
The message_seq = 0 is used by HelloVerifyRequest, which is also been
processed by client
and been fed into its transcript hash function.

So I think the HelloVerifyRequest should be counted and new ServerHello in
the figure
should start with message_seq = 1.

Thanks,

Zhai Zhaoxuan

On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 3:54 PM Benjamin Kaduk <[e-mail]> wrote:

> That might be an artifact from Ack having at one point (the -00) been
> a handshake message.  Though, it seems that the Server's message_seq
> space should also start at 0 with ServerHello, if I am understanding
> correctly.
>
> -Ben
>
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 03:15:38PM +0800, Xuan k wrote:
> >  Hi Ekr,
> >
> > Thanks for your help.
> >
> > I have another question about the "message_seq" in section "6. Example of
> > Handshake with Timeout and Retransmission".
> > Could you please explain it?
> >
> > In the secion 6, the Client send message_seq = 0 in Record 0 and
> > message_seq = 2,3,4 in Record 2.
> >
> > Why message_seq = 1 is skipped by Client?
> > I think the ClientHello in the figure should begin with message_seq=1.
> The
> > message_seq = 0 is used by the first ClientHello which is the one without
> > cookies.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Zhai Zhaoxuan
> >
> > On 11/28/19 5:37 AM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 10:05 PM Xuan k <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I'm trying to implement a DTLS1.3 library for embedded devices. But It
> > > seems something weird about retransmissions and ACKs.
> > >
> > > In the section "5.2. DTLS Handshake Message Format":
> > >
> > >    The first message each side transmits in each association always has
> > >    message_seq = 0.  Whenever a new message is generated, the
> > >    message_seq value is incremented by one.  When a message is
> > >    retransmitted, the old *message_seq value is re-used*, i.e., not
> > >    incremented.  From the perspective of the DTLS record layer, the
> > >    retransmission is a new record.  This record will have a *new*
> > > *   DTLSPlaintext.sequence_number* value.
> > >
> > >
> > > In the section "7. ACK Message", the ACK message use the record_numbers
> > > (corresponds to *DTLSPlaintext.sequence_number*).
> > >
> > > For my understanding, the "message_seq" belongs to "Handshake" and the
> > > "sequence_number" or "record_numbers" belongs to
> > > record layer.
> > >
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > The retransmission detection is done by "Handshake" using "message_seq",
> > > but the "acknowledge" is done by "record layer" using "record_numbers".
> > > It is so weird.
> > >
> >
> > Hmm... I don't think that this is particularly weird. This is, for
> > instance, how QUIC stream acknowledgement and retransmission works.
> >
> >
> > The retransmission, retransmission detection and acknowledge should be
> done
> > > in handshake process, but we need the record layer passing the
> > > record_numebrs to the handshake process.
> > >
> > > Since a new "sequence_number" is used for retransmission, we have to
> > > maintain a "record_numbers" to "message_seq" map with dynamic size.
> > > Each retransmission attempt creates a new relationship between a new
> > > "record_numbers" to an old "message_seq".
> > >
> >
> > Yes, that's how it works in NSS.
> >
> >
> > Since ACK is only used with Handshake messages, is it possible that we
> use
> > > "message_seq" in ACK messages?
> > >
> > Or we use *old* "sequence_number" for retransmission,
> > >
> >
> > Both of these give you strictly less information about the network. One
> of
> > the cool innovations in QUIC is to label each packet separately so you
> can
> > determine whether an ACK is an ACK of the original packet or a
> retransmit.
> > We are trying to inherit tha there
> >
> > -Ekr
> >
> > so we do not need maintain the dynamic map. And if replay detection is
> > > implemented, the retransmitted
> > > record can be dropped by record layer (by replay detection), the
> > > "Handshake Protocol" do not need to do retransmission detection.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Zhai Zhaoxuan
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > TLS mailing list
> > > [e-mail]
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
> > >
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > TLS mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>
>