-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 203
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Change connection ID with Transport Parameters #1041
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think that it is easier to make the switch with the change to 1-RTT protected packets. Creating another mini-protocol here complicates things considerably. Outside of cases with packet loss (where you can't rely on the client being able to recover the transport parameters), the only real difference is that you are changing the connection ID sent with the client's second flight (it's set of Handshake packets).
Now, I agree that there is potentially some value in having the right markings on the client Handshake packets, but maybe the right answer here is to use NEW_CONNECTION_ID.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One of the goals of this change is to allow connection ID changes to occur before switching to 1RTT, so only allowing the switch with 1RTT packets defeats half the point.
NEW_CONNECTION_ID wouldn't change the encryption level issues. And we'd have to allow it during the handshake, which we don't today. It seems more complex than this approach, but it's probably doable.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree with @ianswett, that the client should be the one that starts using the new connection ID first. Otherwise, you are back to one of the original problems of multiple clients on the same 4-tuple and it is impossible to determine which of them to deliver the newly received packet to.