Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

8
  • Seems to me that packet 4 isn't necessary either right - it is just designed to wait for it.
    – Paul
    Commented Apr 29, 2012 at 12:02
  • @Paul, that's sort of like saying "resume" isn't necessary after a "pause".
    – Old Pro
    Commented Apr 29, 2012 at 16:02
  • @OldPro, I'm not sure that waiting for 4° is a good idea, packets captured tend to get lost especially when they travel through the air.
    – cYrus
    Commented Apr 29, 2012 at 18:14
  • @cYrus, waiting for 4 is essential, as encryption keys have to be changed simultaneously on both sides. If the client doesn't receive 4, it doesn't know that the base received 3. If the client doesn't receive 4, it sends 3 again (which triggers a resend of 4) until it either receives 4 or gives up trying to create the connection.
    – Old Pro
    Commented Apr 29, 2012 at 18:20
  • @OldPro: I'm not talking about the protocol. Both sides can receive all the packets, but they might be dropped or not captured by the entity that passively captures the traffic.
    – cYrus
    Commented Apr 29, 2012 at 18:27