Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2019 22:14:48 -0800
From: Kazuho Oku <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts
 <reply+0166e4aba82f70fd796552a1cd0904cabd6627570534794292cf000000011874e05892a169ce18321f5a@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2400/461702432@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2400@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2400@github.com>
Subject: Re: [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_5c5d1e5838460_2ca93fad0f4d45bc1725b8";
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/GSmUAnlsKxUWFl_NZwSuth-xxsw>


----==_mimepart_5c5d1e5838460_2ca93fad0f4d45bc1725b8
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> (2) bring it under header protection for server-generated packets only.

I would oppose to such a design, because that disables a reverse proxy from using a single port for accepting connections and also for initiating connections, assuming that either the proxy or a middlebox in front of the proxy relies on the QUIC bit to route the packets. Greasing would be fine, because it's not something to be required for every endpoint to implement.

> Are there any privacy implications to there being a "client bit"?

The bit would be a good indicator to police P2P traffic for ISPs...

-- 
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#issuecomment-461702432
----==_mimepart_5c5d1e5838460_2ca93fad0f4d45bc1725b8
Content-Type: text/html;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<blockquote>
<p>(2) bring it under header protection for server-generated packets only=
.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I would oppose to such a design, because that disables a reverse proxy=
 from using a single port for accepting connections and also for initiati=
ng connections, assuming that either the proxy or a middlebox in front of=
 the proxy relies on the QUIC bit to route the packets. Greasing would be=
 fine, because it's not something to be required for every endpoint to im=
plement.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Are there any privacy implications to there being a "client bit"?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The bit would be a good indicator to police P2P traffic for ISPs...</p=
>

<p style=3D"font-size:small;-webkit-text-size-adjust:none;color:#666;">&m=
dash;<br />You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thre=
ad.<br />Reply to this email directly, <a href=3D"https://github.com/quic=
wg/base-drafts/issues/2400#issuecomment-461702432">view it on GitHub</a>,=
 or <a href=3D"https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AWbkq5AB=
KchZkBGUR6nk7Ap3rFhAq8knks5vLRXYgaJpZM4afXoe">mute the thread</a>.<img sr=
c=3D"https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AWbkqxIBBWmXHwt5l32UWKMA4GTt=
o6MMks5vLRXYgaJpZM4afXoe.gif" height=3D"1" width=3D"1" alt=3D"" /></p>
<script type=3D"application/json" data-scope=3D"inboxmarkup">{"api_versio=
n":"1.0","publisher":{"api_key":"05dde50f1d1a384dd78767c55493e4bb","name"=
:"GitHub"},"entity":{"external_key":"github/quicwg/base-drafts","title":"=
quicwg/base-drafts","subtitle":"GitHub repository","main_image_url":"http=
s://github.githubassets.com/images/email/message_cards/header.png","avata=
r_image_url":"https://github.githubassets.com/images/email/message_cards/=
avatar.png","action":{"name":"Open in GitHub","url":"https://github.com/q=
uicwg/base-drafts"}},"updates":{"snippets":[{"icon":"PERSON","message":"@=
kazuho in #2400: \u003e (2) bring it under header protection for server-g=
enerated packets only.\r\n\r\nI would oppose to such a design, because th=
at disables a reverse proxy from using a single port for accepting connec=
tions and also for initiating connections, assuming that either the proxy=
 or a middlebox in front of the proxy relies on the QUIC bit to route the=
 packets. Greasing would be fine, because it's not something to be requir=
ed for every endpoint to implement.\r\n\r\n\u003e Are there any privacy i=
mplications to there being a \"client bit\"?\r\n\r\nThe bit would be a go=
od indicator to police P2P traffic for ISPs..."}],"action":{"name":"View =
Issue","url":"https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2400#issuecomm=
ent-461702432"}}}</script>
<script type=3D"application/ld+json">[
{
"@context": "http://schema.org",
"@type": "EmailMessage",
"potentialAction": {
"@type": "ViewAction",
"target": "https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2400#issuecomment=
-461702432",
"url": "https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2400#issuecomment-46=
1702432",
"name": "View Issue"
},
"description": "View this Issue on GitHub",
"publisher": {
"@type": "Organization",
"name": "GitHub",
"url": "https://github.com"
}
}
]</script>=

----==_mimepart_5c5d1e5838460_2ca93fad0f4d45bc1725b8--