IETF Logo Mail Archive

[quicwg/base-drafts] VN packets may be dropped more often when the QUIC bit is 0 (#2400)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Sat, 02 February 2019 02:25 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 179EE131038 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Feb 2019 18:25:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -11.149
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.149 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-4.553, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, 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 UmHMvxt1_wk5 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Feb 2019 18:25:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-7.smtp.github.com (out-7.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B327130EB8 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Feb 2019 18:25:45 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2019 18:25:43 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1549074343; bh=BhnwvyW7tD/Val+XF5JeSpAGEZYMZFcgto/2+ml32cE=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=fJKt2IbUMhQxHy6UPenxfmki58ha7RKWeToR3ZdR8MzNosF9knCBtzZETy1snKXn8 V3eVEJZnrLdLrIp1rxvGsNp3fuFtgKM6ohYwPtbNZv9aO/AxpEFnPhv9j0exoPtAOA TscCI8EuMqJ7BgApP1yk7P8K08A7WnZHwZiW7zL0=
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abc7127fde47f7e27debd06bb472dada02ea39e3d792cf00000001186cc1a792a169ce18321f5a@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2400@github.com>
Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] VN packets may be dropped more often when the QUIC bit is 0 (#2400)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c54ffa788b64_30d33fd79f8d45bc33910"; 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/E6KT63VPloLj4Lq0lip0HpT7zXA>
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, 02 Feb 2019 02:25:47 -0000

I've had conversations with a number of people who are interested in identifying QUIC using the QUIC bit.  Only one packet does not have the QUIC bit always set to 1 currently, and that's version negotiation.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-quic-transport-18#section-17.2.1

Given we have no use for the extra bits in VN, I'm inclined to specify implementations must set it to 1.

If we think we'll one day want to claw back use of the QUIC bit and allow it to be 0, then this is a poor plan, but I don't think that will end up being practical on the public internet.

A related question is whether we want to put the QUIC bit in the invariants.  It's clearly not technically necessary, but it would recognize the ossification I anticipate.

-- 
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/2400

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email