IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Long Header Packets and Routing Connection IDs (#2834)

Nick Banks <notifications@github.com> Mon, 24 June 2019 20:40 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 8A2A81200E0 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 13:40:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.382
X-Spam-Level:
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: 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 bix-4kxOSFdt for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 13:40:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-21.smtp.github.com (out-21.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.204]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B77BF120041 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 13:40:53 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 13:40:52 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1561408852; bh=9unl3hj1uoPQlbvJ/ZKg+BVdyahC8izqIa1LEl3QTDQ=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=D7IPGoiGa3w8xPdki3CQtmz+FBMGp8kqC4QDk8ROfGtI6+dk+YdKBcL3jZUwv3bP2 o/CLy2x7OZBdCFfuSDlbV88x5/kh+6ohu1OG13YSPtPg5fzX0FQyazeu4qJlzKM3Ke Z4uLIKhf07qSlmAQnMO1NU/SmilYCEKUEcA4Zjcg=
From: Nick Banks <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJKZVMYYSGZLDSF62DQV3DZT5JEVBNHHBWZGHNE@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2834/505172292@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2834@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2834@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Long Header Packets and Routing Connection IDs (#2834)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5d1135544e0a0_47d73f903fecd95c4093c0"; 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/fNKhuzVwHTYvP24dbUahNFZRDLo>
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, 24 Jun 2019 20:40:56 -0000

> What I really want in invariants is a signal to know that a CID which is supposed to be server chosen is in fact client chosen.

I agree with this and that's why I proposed this:

All Long Headers use client chosen CID. All Short Headers use server chosen CID. Therefore, the Long Header bit (invariant) indicates the CID type.

With that design, an LB has two routing algorithms:

1) Long Header (client CID) routing - For example, hash the tuple and/or client CID and use that to select a backend server.
2) Short Header (server CID) routing - Extract server identifier directly from CID. This might entail decryption or just decoding a value.

Both algorithms can be QUIC invariant, but don't have to be.

-- 
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/2834#issuecomment-505172292

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email