Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] 5-tuple routing and SPA (#3608)

Mike Bishop <> Thu, 30 April 2020 13:06 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36A593A0947 for <>; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 06:06:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.516
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.516 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.82, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 SEk1uHvuIROB for <>; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 06:06:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F2D33A09D4 for <>; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 06:05:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 140F9282C58 for <>; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 06:05:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1588251957; bh=aoEB/qbxCuaXaR5fQkSgYqSonbINYB1+gVaHH7I92Yw=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=wnhRerEJsTWzIk9aDVDr1HzmWP5xmAsHwxazX8AEk7Snu64710X1DZsE7xGqCwFha DdalVr2EY0zw9wowYVDW835HSjvLtPoNPXPuWZljy0I8ID1+U8MT9mXc3Yd0EORG0b HrW39lG7GIIA8aY+0aYJEEDM51uT3359R8nu7j+Q=
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 06:05:57 -0700
From: Mike Bishop <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3608/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] 5-tuple routing and SPA (#3608)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5eaacd353a17_72893f9543ecd96c252420"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: MikeBishop
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: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 13:06:08 -0000

> This brings up a related question for me about disable_active_migration. Given a server can decide not to give out any additional connection IDs, doesn't that give it a mechanism for disabling active migration?

IIRC, we had that conversation when deciding whether to add `disable_active_migration` in the first place.  The short version is that taking this approach prevents the client from rotating CIDs on the primary path; if we want the client to be able to rotate CIDs but not migrate, they need to be distinct signals.

@erickinnear, in a way you're correct that clients will have to deal with the fallout regardless of what the server says.  However, the actual use of `disable_active_migration` is likely to trigger a little more than just "don't do that" -- a client might PING more actively to prevent NAT rebindings, for example.  I think it's this hinting aspect that's actually more valuable, since as you note, clients need to be prepared for attempted migrations to fail even with servers that tacitly support them.

> Per-definition, server-preferred address is an address that is capable of receiving packets from any address.

I don't think this is necessarily true, though I agree that we're talking about smaller and smaller fractions of server space.

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