Skip to content
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

Document Limit on Peers MTU #1080

Closed
mikkelfj opened this issue Jan 29, 2018 · 5 comments
Closed

Document Limit on Peers MTU #1080

mikkelfj opened this issue Jan 29, 2018 · 5 comments
Labels
-transport editorial An issue that does not affect the design of the protocol; does not require consensus.

Comments

@mikkelfj
Copy link
Contributor

The current transport draft only discusses minimum MTU. However, a large MTU drains resources on the receiving end and could lead DoS attacks on validation of invalid very large packets. IPv6 has a limit of 64K, but apparently there can also be gigabyte sized jumbograms. Futher, this adds an implicit dependency on IPv6 that might be overlooked when adapting QUIC to other transports.

A receiver can always drop large data grams and thus force a MTU limit, but perhaps some text is needed to make this explicit?

@marten-seemann
Copy link
Contributor

We already have the max_packet_size parameter in the transport parameters.

@mikkelfj
Copy link
Contributor Author

Of course I overlooked max_packet_size in transport parameters.

But I still think some mention is needed in section 9.2 https://quicwg.github.io/base-drafts/draft-ietf-quic-transport.html#rfc.section.9.2

@mikkelfj
Copy link
Contributor Author

mikkelfj commented Jan 29, 2018

We already have the max_packet_size parameter in the transport parameters.

yes I just realized

@mikkelfj mikkelfj changed the title Limit peers MTU Document Limit on Peers MTU Jan 29, 2018
@martinthomson martinthomson added editorial An issue that does not affect the design of the protocol; does not require consensus. -transport labels Jan 29, 2018
@martinthomson
Copy link
Member

PR welcome.

@martinthomson
Copy link
Member

After looking at this, this is fine.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
-transport editorial An issue that does not affect the design of the protocol; does not require consensus.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants