Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify section on negotiating connection IDs (#3349)

Nick Banks <notifications@github.com> Wed, 15 January 2020 19:09 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 [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CEDA12090A for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jan 2020 11:09:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8 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_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: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=github.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UjO8YYOEIker for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jan 2020 11:09:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-19.smtp.github.com (out-19.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.202]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1BD412090B for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2020 11:09:55 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 11:09:54 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1579115394; bh=XNZhujS3nSCS9fES8ItxFrvdxyt2AMwjZpLGCih32Io=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=DyFsHfokQ3qbuc15Bc8MR2BbO7SyTYIOgf7TNkKRRMXHAtqPJKzfbXwqBL5o7yM9G QVE/SfTa3syfWoyYl31S71f3mrAEl3MAIwHk5VCyWbtVmU7AthF+CEa4t26Dr8vbQM bcE1kaVqDtJe2q9Ex+VLyrt6BfHcuY3usIb2DjQE=
From: Nick Banks <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK7TIWGACCYD552EQT54FSLAFEVBNHHCBTP6UY@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3349/review/343453704@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3349@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3349@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify section on negotiating connection IDs (#3349)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e1f6382c2e17_1ea3f8a252cd96088463"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: nibanks
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/VkBoJVdDwlBp19yAzUt9LZC7esA>
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: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 19:09:57 -0000

nibanks commented on this pull request.



> -Initial packet from the server. Once a client has received an Initial packet
-from the server, it MUST discard any packet it receives with a different Source
-Connection ID.
-
-A client MUST only change the value it sends in the Destination Connection ID in
-response to the first packet of each type it receives from the server (Retry or
-Initial); a server MUST set its value based on the Initial packet.  Any
-additional changes are not permitted; if subsequent packets of those types
-include a different Source Connection ID, they MUST be discarded.  This avoids
-problems that might arise from stateless processing of multiple Initial packets
-producing different connection IDs.
-
-The connection ID can change over the lifetime of a connection, especially in
-response to connection migration ({{migration}}); see {{issue-cid}} for details.
+the SCID supplied by the server as the DCID for subsequent packets, including
+all subsequent Handshake and 0-RTT packets. This means that a client might

Why require that all subsequent Handshake packets use the same CID? It's definitely requires for Initial and 0-RTT to have consistent routing through the LB, but I haven't heard any reason to require it for handshake (taking into account possible new CIDs being received, i.e. #3348). IMO, adding extra restrictions here just complicates NEW_CONNECTION_ID handling.

-- 
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/pull/3349#pullrequestreview-343453704