Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Description of the use of Preferred Address is unclear (#3353)

Martin Thomson <> Mon, 20 January 2020 10:03 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEB9C120077 for <>; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 02:03:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.596
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.596 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_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 RfpsUEOakjIH for <>; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 02:03:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54DE91200EB for <>; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 02:03:17 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 02:03:16 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1579514596; bh=wNQ3Yq7AUs6p2GtBirGBMP2nTz/MlV9Id7se0xT+eWw=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=zuADk4xab8sqVDUQpzHTfEZj2rpnioVRCHg4bX0er9NkkRAA0THjEH8I/xDxJf7H5 DM4hyRFnKLunduuB3L582dVDO72nemDV1b7cCNcBwKnxdVvLPhmvP5NkrZpZJ/GzTq XZaZ0csCYcgMznhltaC5293hYY1VS3rois/+CwAg=
From: Martin Thomson <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3353/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Description of the use of Preferred Address is unclear (#3353)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e257ae41fbbf_52f93fbf91ccd964342982"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: martinthomson
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: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 10:03:24 -0000

As requested, I'm forwarding [this comment]( regarding:

> Retirement of either of these connection IDs notifies the server of the address the client has chosen.

This implies a semantic to the retirement of connection IDs that is not already defined. It says that in addition to releasing the resource, the server can say definitively that those other network paths won't be used. But this is misleading because retiring CID 1 does not prevent CID 4 from being used on that path. Nothing says that the connection IDs sent in NEW_CONNECTION_ID have to be used on one or other path. Better to keep the requirement where it is: don't migrate back if you use a preferred address.

Yes, that means that servers can't be sure of behaviour of clients here, but they can use the destination address to confirm acceptance of the preferred address or not. That should suffice.

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