Re: [TLS] PR#28: Converting cTLS to QUIC-style varints

Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net> Tue, 06 October 2020 04:59 UTC

Return-Path: <huitema@huitema.net>
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 EAC273A1114 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Oct 2020 21:59:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.111
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.111 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.213, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 AU70gHmzJXWW for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Oct 2020 21:59:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx43-out1.antispamcloud.com (mx43-out1.antispamcloud.com [138.201.61.189]) (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 690503A1113 for <tls@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Oct 2020 21:59:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from xse366.mail2web.com ([66.113.197.112] helo=xse.mail2web.com) by mx114.antispamcloud.com with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <huitema@huitema.net>) id 1kPf3w-00078H-Fs for tls@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Oct 2020 06:59:02 +0200
Received: from xsmtp21.mail2web.com (unknown [10.100.68.60]) by xse.mail2web.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C54xT475dzLJw for <tls@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Oct 2020 21:58:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.5.2.17] (helo=xmail07.myhosting.com) by xsmtp21.mail2web.com with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <huitema@huitema.net>) id 1kPf3t-000724-FK for tls@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Oct 2020 21:58:53 -0700
Received: (qmail 2912 invoked from network); 6 Oct 2020 04:58:53 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.1.107]) (Authenticated-user:_huitema@huitema.net@[172.58.46.239]) (envelope-sender <huitema@huitema.net>) by xmail07.myhosting.com (qmail-ldap-1.03) with ESMTPA for <tls@ietf.org>; 6 Oct 2020 04:58:52 -0000
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, Marten Seemann <martenseemann@gmail.com>
Cc: tls@ietf.org
References: <CABcZeBPNFhGoLhgqeR9ObwyU68BYq=hXG1PhXcqNsNDNFGGyaw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOYVs2rEDtgJFVpiQkcaaYG2LAyW1hB5Cou4kUoG2_dkxMFTww@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBP3BUDEeiV2T-kxYTmC841XE_BrXhPHSoRqfdH0hHd-6w@mail.gmail.com> <BBA456AB-EC42-47DD-A3E3-5FC0E9E7A534@akamai.com> <CAOYVs2r+AiEs0q6sybqT2CbtLtj4KE4onr-3qjr5vZ5RFPiKOQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBNQ3tk-rGpdJ88q0oaUXXq4B7NQWKp8P8uQOyxA7Lwstg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
Autocrypt: addr=huitema@huitema.net; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mDMEXtavGxYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdA1ou9A5MHTP9N3jfsWzlDZ+jPnQkusmc7sfLmWVz1Rmu0 J0NocmlzdGlhbiBIdWl0ZW1hIDxodWl0ZW1hQGh1aXRlbWEubmV0PoiWBBMWCAA+FiEEw3G4 Nwi4QEpAAXUUELAmqKBYtJQFAl7WrxsCGwMFCQlmAYAFCwkIBwIGFQoJCAsCBBYCAwECHgEC F4AACgkQELAmqKBYtJQbMwD/ebj/qnSbthC/5kD5DxZ/Ip0CGJw5QBz/+fJp3R8iAlsBAMjK r2tmyWyJz0CUkVG24WaR5EAJDvgwDv8h22U6QVkAuDgEXtavGxIKKwYBBAGXVQEFAQEHQJoM 6MUAIqpoqdCIiACiEynZf7nlJg2Eu0pXIhbUGONdAwEIB4h+BBgWCAAmFiEEw3G4Nwi4QEpA AXUUELAmqKBYtJQFAl7WrxsCGwwFCQlmAYAACgkQELAmqKBYtJRm2wD7BzeK5gEXSmBcBf0j BYdSaJcXNzx4yPLbP4GnUMAyl2cBAJzcsR4RkwO4dCRqM9CHpVJCwHtbUDJaa55//E0kp+gH
Message-ID: <0dd8e4f5-ae60-ef32-2352-65db5939db85@huitema.net>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2020 21:58:53 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBNQ3tk-rGpdJ88q0oaUXXq4B7NQWKp8P8uQOyxA7Lwstg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------AE52EC71347221E28F244EEC"
Content-Language: en-US
X-Originating-IP: 66.113.197.112
X-Spampanel-Domain: xsmtpout.mail2web.com
X-Spampanel-Username: 66.113.197.0/24
Authentication-Results: antispamcloud.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=66.113.197.0/24@xsmtpout.mail2web.com
X-Spampanel-Outgoing-Class: unsure
X-Spampanel-Outgoing-Evidence: Combined (0.15)
X-Recommended-Action: accept
X-Filter-ID: Mvzo4OR0dZXEDF/gcnlw0Z1apovzGPsYhEeBL1aoZmqpSDasLI4SayDByyq9LIhVUZbR67CQ7/vm /hHDJU4RXkTNWdUk1Ol2OGx3IfrIJKywOmJyM1qr8uRnWBrbSAGDoOWO0i/H75teRGzF9TgV+efH zJ6mVE7ewsipSVIfs4bptGQUfypx9R01nhFnVB0WgyWFxOA5dILPypvKxNVhWQwOVcNrdpWfEYrY fLBY3+c10h9aHNaslh2Yjb8ceaq51aOsarGPChhedL2Py5oHk46jSvfpO+1kZkomjtjB6X5Q5Q9f RUeIpTIC2ySfqvnqLwoxlgatmaBb0rBiK9xbkDrUqzcKIief90MVLZY9LbIZh9+IQ1oS9LBn3VIP 95Jz7ujRlJ9wSMlhvaudJXZ9EIBG/qaR+8r9SKFMmPJLf850OvZYsmoVQuOIhwKLK6IKBNB4LZ0v UHHKTzJX7b1JhLSQQ4vSj0QEim26t/Moy0UPX5E73H1QfrH/5kkrV/Cr0bm2vWdo8usP65i82q1C dZgGrpL44wdx9eXqjQjbvUopOMQJvQ/Ck3iiU+4DQAj3fuQgzT3K9JUHTNiGwfwAm1iez9GB/vVI PBTzV+UYoQ5juR84l1u3F4RJk4edtIO8IFCy+1JoA+F/oVTtZ+KGFzKY3u3yTyOjiuNHs7sAjSnv 5pWb82qAoDl3ILGSF0vmDvI0DEihOd7XzCAIcFZdY11677oPXF7r5zsW33ZNliqbq1iQQhopQxqA dW22RV24tqlHqO4iNmhVOtuMqCqgnBqf27VeHOkXe82afzWlDIufmiijgf0sPuKxhq7+/4gMHHAS JNUmoOHSoqgqxfHmWRWcrRhLeB34s3hUb32GO+2KvoSJBW8dq7bxVHTZEn+108QV3No+S2msRDep v5w/kkG0v17AmegcpQ0tml/sN9lmMy/o83jVXTcfb9k0nLWblJy7uxV6dw8jzlsaNZe6hynMJcjx DydxsJEju76A7X1QIVydqXpZ6MHhiKws9Iiut28r9wo4SqUIg8Yh9hAM0n3LLzx/F2gT3wl8JQJv Bho=
X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@quarantine11.antispamcloud.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/aqou1cYAcLb0DMzIOnyDFpzlBSw>
Subject: Re: [TLS] PR#28: Converting cTLS to QUIC-style varints
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: Tue, 06 Oct 2020 04:59:07 -0000

1994 called. It wanted to talk about distinguished encoding rules.

On 10/5/2020 8:08 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> I don't have a strong opinion on whether to require a minimal
> encoding, but if we're not going to use QUIC's encoding as-is, then I
> would rather stick with the existing scheme, which has twice as large
> a range for the 1 byte encoding and is thus more compact for a range
> of common cases.
>
> -Ekr
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 7:31 PM Marten Seemann <martenseemann@gmail.com
> <mailto:martenseemann@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     In that case, why use QUIC's encoding at all? It would just put
>     the burden on the receiver to check that the minimal encoding was
>     used.
>     Would it instead make more sense to modify QUIC's encoding, such
>     that the 2-byte encoding doesn't encode the numbers from 0 to
>     16383, but the numbers from 64 to (16383 + 64), and equivalently
>     for 4 and 8-byte encodings?
>
>     On Tue, Oct 6, 2020 at 9:22 AM Salz, Rich <rsalz@akamai.com
>     <mailto:rsalz@akamai.com>> wrote:
>
>         Can you just say “QUIC rules but use the minimum possible length”?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls