Subject: [TLS] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-dtls-connection-id-11: (with COMMENT)

From: Martin Duke via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 12:46:53 -0700

Martin Duke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-tls-dtls-connection-id-11: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-dtls-connection-id/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for this document.

Section 9.3.3 of quic-transport, which deals with basically the same security
model, also requires the receiving endpoint to probe the original address, not
just the new one, to address a somewhat more difficult attack. It would be good
to at least RECOMMEND this behavior for DTLS applications, and/or
(repeat/informatively reference) the logic there.