IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Masque] ECN & Flow IDs

Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com> Tue, 30 March 2021 22:40 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: masque@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: masque@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B25523A11F0 for <masque@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 15:40:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mEzzhvJhnQpO for <masque@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 15:40:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd34.google.com (mail-io1-xd34.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E3BE3A1236 for <masque@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 15:40:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd34.google.com with SMTP id k8so18072937iop.12 for <masque@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 15:40:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=N5UvBpKMWPPGeQHcMWLvfwE9P3G5tSWjjrux/9LZtIw=; b=UHUt4P5WM83AfAfmoPSONAgLqAef6x90SefIS+l0Axa7K7yPNMyfOw4gs+lOfNgXw4 3LrFKnD60k+JDPBlw1dobtfAw9bF3mg4dlJsadCGvLD6orm+xJ2q8KA43XlxI+0tO42g sxhBXd+oIr1CRDRsGKmih+pQFQ9e2vRVsGTkDsochKQyLZgkE3PhyokMM1QV5UharSdz wNQVGnsTpyJqDpJ9xz7ttHJ/GSPyCm9GbI3mfSsOoS/KLS3fjdP0WLy41RQcCVfKmhHo R/sBFmillHWFRbSKuDo96NxM3YlqoabsNHurPcA6+dnRZ+ZmrAdVD3VNiBWkLnA1mgvW Lgug==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=N5UvBpKMWPPGeQHcMWLvfwE9P3G5tSWjjrux/9LZtIw=; b=BWi4DysvGTxf1+69iYw6dMshYpjBd4OcXriQaBOhENoTbT12HVZTSRKkqV7X3AYCll jVTRF1bBeFNdUR3hpI9qX+l7o2WMkTW32HH+7deZ713A2TAq7Kq9HucRv0EAJsXavBcL qgtM5HF6Pgu8Y+TqGf/6qkX4fbkVBKyaZfn1n0Eq/DF9aMS6oXwMsBzeeQKe2tZlmp3E W/jrOgUd0FGCOhosTkUa2PmOKh2h9V3Wl4ZFmRIzxiIM+CrNl1B6PZRE7LhY3KGsgDnh ciz8zofzgy8tCy9jNKDDU6QZUTeg26HUoZx9ySJMi/ZJCbS9Qy+n+9I2FN2WRZaeSfrE pNQA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532mkyuSQZ49mht7Xv1AAMWT8bG96Y0nDhAfG2GMJoC0skmwqZm7 rwwqIV8g1czToMt/29UqeFpwUjRGtF1iLrqrJToRCB7sbX6hew==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx+Yzf4QAjbzrWPpiAsiuAiUci3uWwEvpInGXmr9GZ33BtQYrL6Ox9T0oHTkh8dc5rXYfZNxvmbeb5KB0XKU5o=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6602:2094:: with SMTP id a20mr122215ioa.19.1617144014022; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 15:40:14 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 15:40:10 -0700
Message-ID: <CAM4esxRmjWr-y-9-KAJmmKvGdONpPufgAbubUhPu_KaS1_Md9Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: MASQUE <masque@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000081ac7d05bec8aed5"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/masque/VuSvft_0yMgTpz_91WL2I0WMBgA>
Subject: [Masque] ECN & Flow IDs
X-BeenThere: masque@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiplexed Application Substrate over QUIC Encryption <masque.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/masque>, <mailto:masque-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/masque/>
List-Post: <mailto:masque@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:masque-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/masque>, <mailto:masque-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 22:40:23 -0000

Hello MASQUE,

At IETF 110 there was a lot of good discussion challenging the foundations
of the CONNECT-UDP framework, including the relationship between streams
and Flow-IDs. While CONNECT-UDP happens to use flow IDs somewhat
incidentally, the real action with the controversial
multiple-flow-id-per-CONNECT happens in David's (unadopted) ECN draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-schinazi-masque-connect-udp-ecn/

Leading up to the interim, it would be great if one of the detractors of
the flow-id mapping submitted their own approach to solve ECN. This would
help to illuminate the tradeoffs. Speaking as an individual, I am also
hoping to move the ECN work forward and having another design would help to
do that.

Thanks,
Martin

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email