IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Equivalence of preferred_address and NEW_CONNECTION_ID (#3560)

Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com> Wed, 01 April 2020 03:13 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 15EA43A07D6 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 20:13:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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_20=0.7, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 G-kCEcTWki4i for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 20:13:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-5.smtp.github.com (out-5.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8514E3A07CB for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 20:13:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-cd7bc13.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-cd7bc13.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.25.102]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AA36960720 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 20:13:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1585710796; bh=z5A46xCEetaucuNcJlmpxMgvE9AAQtuIjTDEifO5viw=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=XDIXHKe3+4yyc37PnV9fDOLvHPXl41OXHEoCHtWYk9AHS4D9gaGvPclHkzDIzelBD WYxYK0l2Vq/G/BQUynDFcjLXTI+H1Pj00uU77PfTqt39oGZ9S6YjC+tWP5bZu4jswQ ymQ2ayFddQMloeh94ky0peeWlRFvzZXdTnHJxLhI=
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 20:13:16 -0700
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK2FPO5SQSQIHFGIQVN4R7T4ZEVBNHHCGNJIQI@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3560/607002366@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3560@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3560@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Equivalence of preferred_address and NEW_CONNECTION_ID (#3560)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e8406cc2d0ff_5cc23fc1e20cd96883678"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: kazuho
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/BwtTVUod0O2ecYI9QabXcxQso9E>
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: Wed, 01 Apr 2020 03:13:19 -0000

My preference goes to option 4 too.

I do not think servers would use both 0-byte CID and preferred_address TP at the same time. The only case a server using 0-byte CID can also use preferred_address is:
* when the server is never accepting more than one connection at a time, or
* when the server knows that the client's address tuple does not change when the client migrates to a new address

IMO that's a niche. And when these cases can be met, I do not see why the client cannot know the preferred address of the server beforehand.

-- 
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/3560#issuecomment-607002366

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email