Skip to content

Conversation

@LPardue
Copy link
Contributor

@LPardue LPardue commented Jan 15, 2024

RFC 9000 has some low-level requirements for who is allowed to send
a NEW_TOKEN frame, and what the token value can be.

This change adds stricter NEW_TOKEN frame checks. It leaves any
more advanced handling of the Retry mechanism as continuing TODO.

@LPardue LPardue requested a review from a team as a code owner January 15, 2024 11:07
@LPardue LPardue force-pushed the stricter_new_token_checking branch from ca37014 to bb80141 Compare January 15, 2024 11:16
return Err(Error::ProtocolViolation);
}

if token.is_empty() {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This should go in the frame parsing code I think.

RFC 9000 has some low-level requirements for who is allowed to send
a NEW_TOKEN frame, and what the token value can be.

This change adds stricter NEW_TOKEN frame checks. It leaves any
more advanced handling of the Retry mechanism as continuing TODO.
@LPardue LPardue force-pushed the stricter_new_token_checking branch from bb80141 to e449b91 Compare January 15, 2024 12:50
@ghedo ghedo merged commit 1684118 into master Jan 15, 2024
@ghedo ghedo deleted the stricter_new_token_checking branch January 15, 2024 12:55
mgjeong pushed a commit to mgjeong/quiche that referenced this pull request Feb 13, 2024
RFC 9000 has some low-level requirements for who is allowed to send
a NEW_TOKEN frame, and what the token value can be.

This change adds stricter NEW_TOKEN frame checks. It leaves any
more advanced handling of the Retry mechanism as continuing TODO.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants