Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify text around preferred address (#3589)

Eric Kinnear <> Tue, 21 April 2020 04:37 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3B1E3A0871 for <>; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 21:37:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.199
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.199 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_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, 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 xaPIEduiBsW6 for <>; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 21:37:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E2C03A0870 for <>; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 21:37:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BCB1C607BE for <>; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 21:37:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1587443836; bh=rq2rgbfnny0pXJtY2Ea2vRlcifHFklBrLVy/J/TIKUM=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=kxzUlSdvBubDEZF4Il5QlJV2f5t6+tI/Ah3XG7xu9MYdShopVOqzyOBjOq7fsQmVh +JVYfk6u9LXMPfB811MPzA98h0QGZVnXEVsa1Jh+gBO6svE0+vRMxdMMAlV40z89Pa xIpG68+dvfB83CZWLyY/MJCmF9vLV4qjWuS7uhVQ=
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 21:37:16 -0700
From: Eric Kinnear <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3589/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify text around preferred address (#3589)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e9e787c2cf8a_4f323f86beccd95c377267"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: erickinnear
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: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 04:37:21 -0000

@erickinnear commented on this pull request.

> +Similarly, an endpoint MUST NOT reuse a connection ID when sending to more than
+one destination address, for example when responding to a change in the address
+of a peer if the packet with the new peer address uses an active connection ID
+that has not been previously used by the peer.

Thanks! This is nice wording, added in 5509f1d.
Re: rationale, I think that's mostly covered by two notes indicating that this can happen.
This one, the immediate next paragraph after the sentence in question:
These requirements regarding connection ID reuse apply only to the sending of
packets, as unintentional changes in path without a change in connection ID are
possible.  For example, after a period of network inactivity, NAT rebinding
might cause packets to be sent on a new path when the client resumes sending.
An endpoint responds to such an event as described in {{migration-response}}.
and, immediately after the other place we talk about this kind of interaction: 
Not all changes of peer address are intentional, or active, migrations. The peer
could experience NAT rebinding: a change of address due to a middlebox, usually
a NAT, allocating a new outgoing port or even a new outgoing IP address for a
flow.  An endpoint MUST perform path validation ({{migrate-validate}}) if it
detects any change to a peer's address, unless it has previously validated that

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