Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Stateless Reset from clients, bis (#1505)

MikkelFJ <notifications@github.com> Tue, 03 July 2018 06:30 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@github.com>
X-Original-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C422130DF3 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 23:30:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.01
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=github.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 FEIDbaN4BSFE for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 23:30:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-4.smtp.github.com (out-4.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D18D0126DBF for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 23:30:08 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 23:30:08 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1530599408; bh=qwGQ10EG0ICwm1RCJOenfbplzdQDNnZq7iqu9CnvNE4=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=P9wjeVhn3+uCViKNePEKOkDg35Qyv5jmiRRFX31fkdA6yhR57LIfUxqQU5sfOMo4J Dby2toYnnGELNi/5FkpSqAslbO9J+MLhjcP9T6wZ5gDf5L0cnXSWO/Co2fVkJ1tkzM 8yPhZzUNwpL1eophZF4/m8Fk62nhbBW52ZE4kPxg=
From: MikkelFJ <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abfc573a2517bf23183f3ea2b5dfa11b3f7bf1691292cf000000011752d9f092a169ce1418889d@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1505/402027524@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1505@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1505@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Stateless Reset from clients, bis (#1505)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5b3b17f08649_114c43f91c04c0f7c371256"; 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
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/3Kn79txIqVVHqNpNl-cl62skasI>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <quic-issues.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic-issues/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic-issues@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2018 06:30:11 -0000

@igorlord : in P2P you could argue that ephemeral ports are not so easily exchausted when the client has long living connections to peers, as opposed to short lived loadbalancer forwards.

But in a mesh network it is much more convenient to just stick to a single port and avoid all problems with ports differing, especially when use interfaces like netmap where you have to manage to ephemeral port. It is vastly simpler to just reuse fixed port, also client side.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1505#issuecomment-402027524