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

Mike Bishop <> Mon, 20 January 2020 20:19 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9078E120827 for <>; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 12:19:55 -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 w-iwzpvgDegl for <>; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 12:19:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6673120825 for <>; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 12:19:51 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 12:19:50 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1579551590; bh=fOm2ok+fEvz4r2K6YIc4KKh1OsbBCSguGjcZE+mcIpk=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=1xNjMWTQSMQG41kEUxeB8CpSgjcKPadwqmGZcKY0RRHr6KYXjUCBfE6xtAykmHyO3 uL+GHlpqnWRSv7eirdWlmhYERLKBRTwY7wdBri68fPQgcNxGueBrdDNzZU9+4H43c1 FGbp1r2vXIwuPb5YEVEk/XS/0d1KwBBnLisKvenw=
From: Mike Bishop <>
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_5e260b66c7a69_1fba3f80e96cd960182645"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: MikeBishop
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 20:19:56 -0000

If the migration is unsuccessful, the client must never try the preferred address again (MUST continue sending all future packets....).  So as @kazuho says, the server can issue address specific (not path-specific) CIDs once it knows whether the client's migration succeeded or failed.

But @martinthomson is correct that this is implicitly sending a signal about failed migration.  If the server sees a CID retired, apparently never used, it might be able to infer that the CID was used for a failed migration, but this case is unique in that the server needs to take some action for a failed migration and uses this signal to do it.

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