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

Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa <notifications@github.com> Mon, 10 June 2019 01:26 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 []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C070C12013B for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Jun 2019 18:26:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.605
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.605 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] 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 ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1Hf5dwOn09uL for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Jun 2019 18:26:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-24.smtp.github.com (out-24.smtp.github.com []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7FF1D12016B for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Sun, 9 Jun 2019 18:26:13 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2019 18:26:11 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1560129971; bh=vuhozOpo80bfmPQ5ZnIOPT4zPkt/2Zx9Iiy/SmonYQE=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=lWcMKjN5U5d+I0jbN46+pw5m4+xgYjWr9Y0QVrS87oKU8hIaK6PwmcCkPgNceZtTT CwL6tW12OnzVIo+c5smLf244Z4a8nQFKhtx+uUp3L7hCPRokogo93Ien69BsqUT0B0 DRtVhXGR4kD20LWXK+KAA+qmEQNokaG0fIfn08lo=
From: Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK66MJMIAB36VHOGSTN3BLSDHEVBNHHBWDXNEU@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2778@github.com>
Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] CID change still required in response to migration? (#2778)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5cfdb1b3ce210_6e273ff8f8ecd96c198065"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: tatsuhiro-t
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/INrEfU_DPGkU98_xPz7F3m1WGp8>
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: Mon, 10 Jun 2019 01:26:23 -0000

There are bunch of changes in migration recently, and they suggests that new CID is required only when endpoint sends a packet from new local address and an endpoint of migrating peer is no longer required to change its CID when sending a packet using new path as long as its local address does not change.

But there are several lines of text left to suggest that an endpoint changes CID:

   An endpoint that initiates migration and requires non-zero-length
   connection IDs SHOULD ensure that the pool of connection IDs
   available to its peer allows the peer to use a new connection ID on
   migration, as the peer will close the connection if the pool is
   An endpoint can change the connection ID it uses for a peer to
   another available one at any time during the connection.  An endpoint
   consumes connection IDs in response to a migrating peer, see
   Section 9.5 for more.

Are they just remnants of old text and should be removed?  or does changing CID in response to migration still a requirement?

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