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

Simplify receiver verification of ECN counters #1565

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jul 17, 2018
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
30 changes: 15 additions & 15 deletions draft-ietf-quic-transport.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -1755,7 +1755,8 @@ counters in subsequent (see {{processing-and-ack}}) ACK_ECN frames (see
{{frame-ack-ecn}}).

A packet detected by a receiver as a duplicate does not affect the receiver's
local ECN codepoint counts to mitigate security concerns ({{security-ecn}}).
local ECN codepoint counts; see ({{security-ecn}}) for relevant security
concerns.

If an endpoint receives a packet without an ECT or CE codepoint, it responds per
{{processing-and-ack}} with an ACK frame.
Expand All @@ -1771,20 +1772,18 @@ the expectation that either the network or the peer no longer supports ECN.
To protect the connection from arbitrary corruption of ECN codepoints by the
network, an endpoint verifies the following when an ACK_ECN frame is received:

* The increase in ECT(0) and ECT(1) counters MUST be at least the number of
packets newly acknowledged that were sent with the corresponding codepoint.

* The total increase in ECT(0), ECT(1), and CE counters reported in the ACK_ECN
frame MUST be equal to the total number of packets newly acknowledged in this
frame MUST be at least the total number of packets newly acknowledged in this
ACK_ECN frame.

* The increase in ECT(0) and ECT(1) counters MUST be no greater than the number
of packets newly acknowledged that were sent with the corresponding codepoint.

* If the increase in the ECT(0), ECT(1) and CE counters are greater than
the number of newly acknowledged packets, and the received ACK's
smallest acknowledged is larger than the previous largest acknowledged,
then it's likely acknowledgements were missed, and the above comparison
MUST NOT be performed. Instead a new comparison point is stored by the
sender so that only changes after this point will be used in the future
comparisons.
An endpoint could miss acknowledgements for a packet when ACK frames are lost.
It is therefore possible for the total increase in ECT(0), ECT(1), and CE
counters to be greater than the number of packets acknowledged in an ACK frame.
When this happens, the local reference counts MUST be increased to match the
counters in the ACK frame.

Upon successful verification, an endpoint continues to set ECT codepoints in
subsequent packets with the expectation that the path is ECN-capable.
Expand All @@ -1795,9 +1794,10 @@ not support ECN.

If an endpoint sets ECT codepoints on outgoing packets and encounters a
retransmission timeout due to the absence of acknowledgments from the peer (see
{{QUIC-RECOVERY}}), the endpoint MAY cease setting ECT codepoints in subsequent
packets. Doing so allows the connection to traverse network elements that drop
packets carrying ECT or CE codepoints in the IP header.
{{QUIC-RECOVERY}}), or if an endpoint has reason to believe that a network
element might be corrupting ECN codepoints, the endpoint MAY cease setting ECT
codepoints in subsequent packets. Doing so allows the connection to traverse
network elements that drop or corrupt ECN codepoints in the IP header.


## Proof of Source Address Ownership {#address-validation}
Expand Down