Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Be more conservative about migration? (#2143)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Sat, 23 March 2019 23:35 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 17F0112D550 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 23 Mar 2019 16:35:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8 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, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 qhjN7vbGetYJ for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 23 Mar 2019 16:35:16 -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 28EBB12D4EF for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Sat, 23 Mar 2019 16:35:16 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2019 16:35:14 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1553384114; bh=+qwt5yqnOEfz95d4fmtSyzZH1qZe/UVNlQUk5gnMPRg=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=bh+nTZDDmc1x/9BNPBb3Qqf8c52QBrb+ax507u3ymGDkVbvfShJlFMqC0oLJaVgwP lcz3FOQu8mcXT1CbLkKyt/e/qfY9bs9MzuprdkbLrM4smGsRLyu1SbkNlmEx0HivQM o5Dprs/P+hj+f1uPC9kQjBDU/69o15ycTrMbinAA=
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abf7c51015581096156ad93d7597213f6054ba539592cf0000000118ae84b292a169ce17495be9@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2143/475914005@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2143@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2143@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Be more conservative about migration? (#2143)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c96c2b289e01_76ea3fb1db0d45b8482211"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ianswett
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/6WyTvLklC5qHI7XfChg9NpVMzzo>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sat, 23 Mar 2019 23:35:18 -0000

Q: Wouldn't the sender of a PATH_CHALLENGE ignore a PATH_RESPONSE that came back from a different peer address than what they send the PATH_CHALLENGE to?

But yes, duplicate packets are insanely rare and receiving a duplicate from different addresses would almost never happen without interference, so it should be a strong signal that the immediate migration should be ignored.  Of course that makes the state machine even more complex, but assuming that duplicate arrives while a PATH_CHALLENGE is outstanding, maybe it's not that much extra complexity?

-- 
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/2143#issuecomment-475914005