Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhile? (was Re: TLS 1.3 Problem?)

Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com> Thu, 01 October 2020 04:33 UTC

Return-Path: <sayrer@gmail.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 0EAC43A0AAF for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 21:33:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, 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 (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 b-7QYDdkwbLp for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 21:33:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd35.google.com (mail-io1-xd35.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d35]) (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 948F43A0AA9 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 21:33:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd35.google.com with SMTP id g128so5158709iof.11 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 21:33:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=jVwp9p2VXHhqddZaiTqTe2bHOPRPBwSRoPLmloLCA0E=; b=saMZotBpcvWNVt63n/ILgs7+1qNs+5Acop6OWc3reDLXYWP7886++aFtJaBAdW0BR0 eoq4l4UK/CknqjZm5M1ozwUOzKlza2tgAi731Gqdd7e8hH8W67AtieIlFq+lE4/twOr8 k03p/bPgSCmIPQ23MfC4SxC0MQbgIapw5k4p608/Cl6C3Yex3OEoVjwhGl3xRbwF4dYj 6Nmkqslje2Suyij/n+f7pZ/zo0iNDL6XKXykGwtAO3PfI+clYqLR9gZVASV+wm17qZPq aOqusrRe7F7oPNVbC41hwJHzKC5tUflFgqHpF77kt49r5mLGm2oy/Q/euaWaFvFh2EEz +1AQ==
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=jVwp9p2VXHhqddZaiTqTe2bHOPRPBwSRoPLmloLCA0E=; b=ktUvIysZXcYp/xqEI3/1GkOdH8aAn2YhFKGbegUENZdodl0+m+2ozi38GkxQAc2xYP 9Pz2Quhad3rGcqz/7fXZTXRNTrJWfhiJMdUEdMQ8faWBwvTRO5BR0dHRu7jhoSbE28/W s4PBCowO5elTgNQ03hA5aombOcfYDzFmCV4s8hALaqLDPwyURU8Juf/aABV52xzIEfkK xNcTmsxP9j9LGK8CPvaaIyRwdsqPy8IDOLRlA8YhyFcojrGYvBuMAgy0goQRgWxMJbt0 wBCP2uLeX9zbmV8BkNIxy4qbRsb+QxP03mpcg3FmUPuVqfkmrJY5O1MLAAanyZBzmOyi siEg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5333DP3fTamEzpA5DI3Dhm8y35nzrn60m5YwiXfsFqBAgE/+uav/ Kj+9TmAPxHhP0MHYg+z7KKryxhDBCWhZDiqxdwU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyIiiI45ByoDro+5yYvJqV4QV+PA5QoBnGJfIPLCjx/lmBRldDgZG+1m6fp2ySOpUxUhOyFedljzyGValkpISk=
X-Received: by 2002:a02:c486:: with SMTP id t6mr4733415jam.131.1601526822666; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 21:33:42 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <0c31f2d6-5f8e-2fd6-9a1a-08b7902dd135@pobox.com> <AM0PR08MB37164F2D0E0CE5FB6D62D461FA350@AM0PR08MB3716.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <1c7e2f31-8a9e-4bd8-9e80-ab18ebeb609f@www.fastmail.com> <CACsn0cmbDz3ML8o5moAacqfXqYQo-Hqi53XQL6UoGYcZBwy-Mg@mail.gmail.com> <96777977-7707-4311-9876-ca3d53f57f3e@www.fastmail.com> <9b2bb784-5895-bc8a-fae5-1c2056972f97@pobox.com> <eaace566-4fe2-4e86-8382-e0583ce43435@www.fastmail.com> <24f5cd7e-4fff-ce47-f9d9-840dff3f23aa@pobox.com> <3b48fa2d-f923-40ee-a93f-e0896a96fc1b@www.fastmail.com> <ba70c2ba-9023-4cc8-974a-01a64a60de2d@www.fastmail.com> <82488341-a4c6-2ed9-d8e2-6479151a5f90@pobox.com> <03ba01d6974e$ffaefe30$ff0cfa90$@gmx.net> <76c30176-f3bf-cc8f-74fb-b875d66e636f@pobox.com> <ABC80E3E-4C18-4290-B13E-50EDC129566B@akamai.com> <bc6251b7-681f-407a-9e30-dc2a430edeaa@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <bc6251b7-681f-407a-9e30-dc2a430edeaa@www.fastmail.com>
From: Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 21:33:31 -0700
Message-ID: <CAChr6Sy_UG2Z1sOvvQSOetkJ5HGUea2SaSAN+kEJu4X-5MeQJg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Michael D'Errico" <mike-list@pobox.com>
Cc: "TLS@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005d04c305b09485db"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/ytwaBwTWZa3RFdDgdA1ktlgjDBE>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhile? (was Re: TLS 1.3 Problem?)
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: Thu, 01 Oct 2020 04:33:52 -0000

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 8:35 PM Michael D'Errico <mike-list@pobox.com>
wrote:

> > Not always; see TCP "fast open" options.
>
> Maybe this should be disabled?  Fortunately if you wanted
> to there is a setsockopt for TCP_FASTOPEN.
>

I am having a difficult time understanding the tradeoffs you're facing.

What software are you working on?

thanks,
Rob