On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 02:02:06PM +0100, Colin Perkins wrote:
Hi,
On 13 Jun 2025, at 14:34, Thomas Fossati wrote:
> The current algorithm is not designed to handle nested rebindings.
> If this occurs (hopefully rarely), the path_response message is
> dropped, and path validation eventually times out. The address is
> not updated, and a new path validation will be triggered when new
> data is received.
I’d also expect this to be an uncommon occurrence, so there’s likely
to need to optimise the behaviour further. It might be helpful to
include the above explanation though, just to be clear that the
protocol doesn’t fail in that case?
Makes sense.
See https://github.com/tlswg/dtls-rrc/pull/94/commits/bc4de703631a222
cheers, thanks again!
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
