Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2019 22:22:36 -0800
From: MikkelFJ <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts
 <reply+0166e4ab9e7de6dcea99200df197c5ca7e0b5e8e0c14ef0a92cf000000011865102c92a169ce180d1061@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2370/review/196813615@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2370@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2370@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Stronger migration handshake (#2370)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="--==_mimepart_5c4d4e2c62bd3_7c563f9161cd45c480859";
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/gIUCqHbX2UoT6EGVhiMTYgnzRxo>


----==_mimepart_5c4d4e2c62bd3_7c563f9161cd45c480859
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

mikkelfj commented on this pull request.



> @@ -1847,6 +1847,11 @@ endpoint migrates to a new address.
 An endpoint MUST NOT initiate connection migration before the handshake is
 finished and the endpoint has 1-RTT keys.  The design of QUIC relies on
 endpoints retaining a stable address for the duration of the handshake.
+Clients MUST NOT initiate connection migration before they are
+certain that their peer also considers the handshake finished. This
+means that in addition to waiting for availability of 1-RTT keys,
+clients MUST wait acknowledgement by the server of one of their
+1-RTT messages before initiating connection migration.
 
 An endpoint also MUST NOT initiate connection migration if the peer sent the
 `disable_migration` transport parameter during the handshake.  An endpoint which

Not in this PR, but why do we use both client, server, peer, and endpoint, when migration can only happen from the client in V1 (or did I miss something?)

-- 
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/2370#pullrequestreview-196813615
----==_mimepart_5c4d4e2c62bd3_7c563f9161cd45c480859
Content-Type: text/html;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<p><b>@mikkelfj</b> commented on this pull request.</p>

<hr>

<p>In <a href="https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2370#discussion_r251222728">draft-ietf-quic-transport.md</a>:</p>
<pre style='color:#555'>&gt; @@ -1847,6 +1847,11 @@ endpoint migrates to a new address.
 An endpoint MUST NOT initiate connection migration before the handshake is
 finished and the endpoint has 1-RTT keys.  The design of QUIC relies on
 endpoints retaining a stable address for the duration of the handshake.
+Clients MUST NOT initiate connection migration before they are
+certain that their peer also considers the handshake finished. This
+means that in addition to waiting for availability of 1-RTT keys,
+clients MUST wait acknowledgement by the server of one of their
+1-RTT messages before initiating connection migration.
 
 An endpoint also MUST NOT initiate connection migration if the peer sent the
 `disable_migration` transport parameter during the handshake.  An endpoint which
</pre>
<p>Not in this PR, but why do we use both client, server, peer, and endpoint, when migration can only happen from the client in V1 (or did I miss something?)</p>

<p style="font-size:small;-webkit-text-size-adjust:none;color:#666;">&mdash;<br />You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.<br />Reply to this email directly, <a href="https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2370#pullrequestreview-196813615">view it on GitHub</a>, or <a href="https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AWbkqwjb3U12fQJ9GVwcfNcG82BgtvQ5ks5vHUWsgaJpZM4aUhBL">mute the thread</a>.<img src="https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AWbkq3bOoJ_zPIcN6_TSthSEunSyHBLdks5vHUWsgaJpZM4aUhBL.gif" height="1" width="1" alt="" /></p>
<script type="application/json" data-scope="inboxmarkup">{"api_version":"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":"https://github.githubassets.com/images/email/message_cards/header.png","avatar_image_url":"https://github.githubassets.com/images/email/message_cards/avatar.png","action":{"name":"Open in GitHub","url":"https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts"}},"updates":{"snippets":[{"icon":"PERSON","message":"@mikkelfj commented on #2370"}],"action":{"name":"View Pull Request","url":"https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2370#pullrequestreview-196813615"}}}</script>
<script type="application/ld+json">[
{
"@context": "http://schema.org",
"@type": "EmailMessage",
"potentialAction": {
"@type": "ViewAction",
"target": "https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2370#pullrequestreview-196813615",
"url": "https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2370#pullrequestreview-196813615",
"name": "View Pull Request"
},
"description": "View this Pull Request on GitHub",
"publisher": {
"@type": "Organization",
"name": "GitHub",
"url": "https://github.com"
}
}
]</script>
----==_mimepart_5c4d4e2c62bd3_7c563f9161cd45c480859--