Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Define NAT rebinding better (#1501)

[Mike Bishop <[e-mail]>]

MikeBishop approved this pull request.



> -note that not all changes of peer address are intentional migrations. The peer
-could experience an unintended change of address due to NAT rebinding; endpoints
-SHOULD perform path validation ({{migrate-validate}}) if the rebinding does not
-cause the connection to fail.
+finished and the endpoint has 1-RTT keys.  The design of QUIC relies on
+endpoints retaining a stable address for the duration of the handshake.
+
+An endpoint also MUST NOT initiate connection migration if the peer sent the
+`disable_migration` transport parameter during the handshake.  An endpoint which
+has sent this transport parameter, but detects that a peer has nonetheless
+migrated to a different network MAY treat this as a connection error of type
+INVALID_MIGRATION.
+
+Not all changes of peer address are intentional migrations. The peer could
+experience NAT rebinding: a change of address due a middlebox, usually a NAT,
+allocating a new outgoing IP address and port for a flow.  Endpoints SHOULD

Typically, but not universally.  I agree with "and/or", or perhaps even making the levels differ more -- "allocating a new port or even a new outgoing IP address for a flow."

-- 
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/pull/1501#pullrequestreview-133308729