Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] 5tuple routing (#3536)

[Mike Bishop <[e-mail]>]

@MikeBishop approved this pull request.



> @@ -1156,6 +1156,34 @@ SHOULD ignore any such packets.
 
 Servers MUST drop incoming packets under all other circumstances.
 
+### Considerations for 5-tuple routing architectures
+
+QUIC endpoints can be deployed behind a 5-tuple based routing architecture that
+delivers packets based on both the source and destination IP addresses and
+ports. When routing depends on addresses that the endpoint does not control,
+changes to the IP address or port of peers could result in packets being routed
+to a different server. The following actions could mitigate or resolve
+operational and security issues in this case:
+
+* Endpoints can use an out-of-band mechanism to deliver packets to the correct
+destination or transfer state from the original destination.
+
+* A server can request that a connection be migrated to an address that is
+unique using the preferred_address transport parameter. For example, the initial

It seems like the property we're intending to talk about is not uniqueness across clients, but an address that reaches that server specifically rather than a group of servers.  (Or reaches a smaller group of servers capable of internal routing based on CID, which amounts to the same thing.)  Perhaps the right way to express this is "an address that does not rely on 5-tuple routing"?

-- 
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/3536#pullrequestreview-385642642