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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Ignore version negotiation if the client version is present #294

Closed
martinthomson opened this issue Feb 13, 2017 · 2 comments
Closed

Ignore version negotiation if the client version is present #294

martinthomson opened this issue Feb 13, 2017 · 2 comments
Labels
-transport design An issue that affects the design of the protocol; resolution requires consensus. has-consensus An issue that the Chairs have determined has consensus, by canvassing the mailing list.
Milestone
First Implementat...

Comments

@martinthomson
Copy link
Member

That is, if the client picks X and the server returns a version negotiation packet that lists X, then something is badly wrong. That version negotiation packet needs to be treated like internet-detritus.
@mnot mnot added the design An issue that affects the design of the protocol; resolution requires consensus. label Feb 15, 2017
martinthomson added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 27, 2017
@martinthomson
Various version negotiation fixes
6117221 
1. Version negotiation is stateless (this was implied but not made explicit)

2. Client ignores version negotiation packets if it has already done version
   negotiation.

3. Client ignores version negotaition packets if they list the version it is
   using.

Closes #284, #294, #241.
@martinthomson martinthomson mentioned this issue Apr 27, 2017
Merged
@martinthomson
Copy link
Member Author

Note that this isn't necessarily badly wrong; it could be a second version negotiation packet sent by the server in response to a retransmission of the initial client packet. But we don't need to go into that level of detail.

@mnot mnot added this to Handshake in QUIC Apr 28, 2017
@martinthomson
Copy link
Member Author

Closed in #474.

@martinthomson martinthomson removed this from Handshake in QUIC May 4, 2017
@mnot mnot added the has-consensus An issue that the Chairs have determined has consensus, by canvassing the mailing list. label Sep 26, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
-transport design An issue that affects the design of the protocol; resolution requires consensus. has-consensus An issue that the Chairs have determined has consensus, by canvassing the mailing list.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
First Implementation Draft Candidate
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@martinthomson @mnot