IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OPSAWG] QUIC-LB

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Thu, 10 September 2020 00:57 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C66E63A0A2D for <opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 17:57:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.399
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, SUBJ_ALL_CAPS=0.5, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 V8e1HojjtIHM for <opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 17:57:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06D803A0A36 for <opsawg@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 17:57:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1328389CD; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 20:36:26 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id qOYqovibZvcY; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 20:36:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEB50389C9; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 20:36:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8B02553; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 20:57:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>, opsawg@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <CAM4esxTHu-tWVjCOcKv5kFr35t7RXUyU0eiUni_uXVRrjFNrRQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAM4esxTHu-tWVjCOcKv5kFr35t7RXUyU0eiUni_uXVRrjFNrRQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2020 20:57:33 -0400
Message-ID: <5364.1599699453@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/1uyWQIlO7lr_YOkk45Irc2Or4E8>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] QUIC-LB
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/opsawg/>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 00:58:06 -0000

Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com> wrote:
    > I would like to call your attention to this draft adopted by the QUIC
    > WG: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-quic-load-balancers/
    > https://github.com/quicwg/load-balancers

    > Since QUIC is structured to avoid unauthorized intervention by
    > intermediaries, this is basically a means of server explicit consent to
    > cooperate with stateless load balancers, DDoS services, and crypto
    > offload.

Interesting.

    > The QUIC WG is filled with QUIC server implementers. However, there are
    > basically no L4 load balancer operators in the conversation, so maybe
    > we're specifying things with no real path to deployment. While we know
    > what the necessary configuration items are, we don't have the knowledge
    > about what kind of configuration framework would fit neatly in cloud
    > deployments and the like.

    > Is opsawg the right audience to help answer these questions? If not,
    > perhaps you can point me to a better community for this conversation?

I don't think you'll find the L4 load balancers in opsawg.

I don't think you'll find many at IETF.
Yes, people from companies that make them, but not the people themselves.
Maybe they will relay the message internally, but I'm skeptical.
I'd love to be proven wrong.

Don't the CDNs, and "Big Tech" companies basically inhouse develope many of
their own L4 load balancers?  So if you have Apple/Azure/Facebook/Google...?

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email