Thanks Matt, Appreciate ur response and tips
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 3:36 PM, Matt Caswell <matt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Care should also be taken about when you are starting your "timer" and
On 16/06/17 20:08, Benjamin Kaduk via openssl-users wrote:
> On 06/16/2017 01:58 PM, Neetish Pathak wrote:
>> Hello
>> Thanks
>> I tried reading some content from the server side and I observed the
>> new_session_cb getting invoked in that case on the client side. I
>> understand that may be due to delayed NewSession info transfer from
>> server side to client side. But it is helpful for saving the session
>> info on the client side. (Thanks Matt for your input)
>>
>> However, now I have two concerns
>>
>> 1) I see that latency for handshake with session resumption in TLS 1.3
>> has not improved as much as it improves for TLS 1.2
>> With TLS 1.3, I observed that resumption brings down the connection
>> time from 2.5 ms to 1.2-1.3 ms
>> while with TLS 1.2 (using either session IDs or tickets), the
>> connection time reduces from 2.5 ms to 0.5-0.6 ms.
>>
>> The whole code is similar for running the two experiments with only
>> max TLS version changed. Can someone comment on the latency
>> measurements for the two cases.
>> TLS 1.3 is supposed to be better than TLS 1.2 in my opinion. Please
>> comment.
>>
>
> Are you seeing a HelloRetryRequest in the resumption flow? That would
> add an additional round trip. (Your numbers in milliseconds are of
> course not transferrable to other systems; round-trips is an easier to
> understand number.) RFC 5246 and draft-ietf-tls-tls13-20 both have
> message-flow diagrams that show the number of round trips in various
> handshake flows.
when you stop it, e.g. if you stop your timer after the session ticket
data has been received by the client then this is not a "fair" test (the
connection is ready for data transfer earlier than the arrival of the
session ticket).
I would expect to see the TLS1.3 latency for a full handshake to be
around the same as for a TLS1.2 resumption handshake. With a TLS1.3
resumption only marginally different. There are the same number of round
trips for a TLS1.3 full handshake as that there are for a resumption
one. The primary difference is that the Certificate message is not sent
(which can be quite a large message).
Your timings suggest you are testing this over a LAN where the effects
of network latency are going to be relatively low. The real benefits
from fewer round trips will really be seen when network latency is more
significant.
In my application program, I put start and stop timer before and after SSL_accept on server side and before and after SSL_connect on the client side.
I am not sure how I can put timers at individual steps of Handshake using my client applications. I was assuming SSL and SSL_accept take care of the entire handshake process.
Yes, I am testing on local machine. I will migrate my test to remote machines. But I am not really able to understand why TLS 1.3 is slower on my machine.
Also, it is difficult to see all the messages for TLS 1.3 since all messages after server hello are encrypted when I see on Wireshark. So I am not sure where exactly session ticket info is exchanged
>
>> 2) PSK (Pre-shared keys) for resumption are highly emphasized in TLS
>> 1.3 RFC. How do we generate pre-shared keys in advance even without
>> making the first connection. Can someone guide me in the right direction.
As Ben says this is not currently supported in master but there is
pending WIP PR to add it.
>>
>
> The security properties of such "external" PSKs are substantially
> different than the "ephemeral" PSKs used in resumption flows.
Ben - Even external PSKs incorporate an ephemeral, per connection, ECDHE
based secret (assuming a suitable kex_mode is used). What do you see as
the concern?
Matt
--
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
-- openssl-users mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
