Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] CID change still required in response to migration? (#2778)

MikkelFJ <> Mon, 10 June 2019 08:55 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F150120072 for <>; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 01:55:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.463
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.463 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HKyEcjqvUrDP for <>; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 01:55:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0620120043 for <>; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 01:55:49 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2019 01:55:48 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1560156948; bh=5+jF1RSsA9wvFKWioPoFrhBwksNa1NQDbApETxMT6LU=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=Gti9LAJHXKmTkuoiNkbV0xI7PmZzLUEBni9xuB4SC1ju0AEuEQwXXwxDujU2AWf62 EkacNhzyXfVdaKsgyUbota6neLF2PJOV255zFsKE4hh4lUlvY/pxGj0zqDYoz4SIfw 1700GDV0iXWwnfL9j7WdO/q4wKsWaQw+SAKraSHg=
From: MikkelFJ <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2778/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] CID change still required in response to migration? (#2778)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5cfe1b14ba194_26b83fb8da6cd96486043d"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: mikkelfj
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2019 08:55:52 -0000

The key principle is to not reuse a CID on a new path if it can be avoided. I'm not sure about the CID terminating if the pool is exhausted - in your quoted text. I think it may choose to do so (and is encouraged to do so) but I'm not sure it is required to.

Changing CID in response to a peers migration is therefore relevant but changing CID just because the peer changes CID is problematic because it might never end.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: