Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] CID change still required in response to migration? (#2778)

MikkelFJ <> Thu, 15 August 2019 05:50 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 936A3120044 for <>; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 22:50:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.382
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.382 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_24=1.618, 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 6farc3FT_slF for <>; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 22:50:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04769120019 for <>; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 22:50:33 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 22:50:32 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1565848232; bh=hpguU7m5DphxmFy3MdF+zjfzU7R63v/FimRDtgDW3z8=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=l5N4unDzgn2n8yhx4ssHEDx35VPNSHNlIPslkbIc4kkdgvaCjUiAJDzxlTHcARjrU /l3SORy+rhjW+s8j7gNpi2zfHc6n6Uq1ysdPNWLvdUCdqrS8T+v+/SN5BpNV5aYTWE r+drByKo+X+QYBARjZpW10BPYr24VObFRC8gGebg=
From: MikkelFJ <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2778/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] CID change still required in response to migration? (#2778)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d54f2a8176b9_42823fc7970cd96c448477"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: mikkelfj
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: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 05:50:35 -0000

> In reviewing this, I think we've messed up badly. We currently only mandate the use of a new connection ID for the initiator of a migration. A peer that responds to a connection migration has to change a connection ID if the initiator changed their connection ID.

This has been discussed at length and while I tend to agree that this is not a good design, I believe things ended up as they are due to concerns about endless CID change loops. I think that can be prevented without too much complexity, but that argument was one of the drivers, as I recall.

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