Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Can Initial/0-RTT CIDs safely be used for routing? (#2026)

Igor Lubashev <notifications@github.com> Thu, 28 February 2019 18:59 UTC

Return-Path: <bounces+848413-a050-quic-issues=ietf.org@sgmail.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 6F58E1289FA for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 10:59:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3 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_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 t0sygje2lkVR for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 10:59:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from o1.sgmail.github.com (o1.sgmail.github.com [192.254.114.176]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BF471200ED for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 10:59:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; h=from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=epQOV+QaW1vhXq24G9GmsL8hO5U=; b=hW5Jb5+dSXNwzn0e 5Rj4p39IObv4gkUwSdRJ+tnBbDQUzoo2TnTo7quOuXlVmsYuMHbouSqNzC0t0v/Z jUlZXHyRrsT6wep2oSpmGlpX2Df5sbT2Zo/UeL2Jlfy2pCDe5eNiz78vrHMIGSmO IFcWzkGiUIq1ubGE/zDRtl4kz7k=
Received: by filter1435p1mdw1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter1435p1mdw1-30257-5C782F8B-54 2019-02-28 18:59:23.86755089 +0000 UTC m=+583291.385407717
Received: from github-lowworker-dcc078e.cp1-iad.github.net (unknown [192.30.252.44]) by ismtpd0002p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id 8rzMMnFJQOGXx96C40lDhA for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 18:59:23.764 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from github.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by github-lowworker-dcc078e.cp1-iad.github.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B74152C0608 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 10:59:23 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 18:59:23 +0000 (UTC)
From: Igor Lubashev <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abadea803e2bcd27a29649a7a617c671bc1b39eeec92cf00000001188ff18b92a169ce16d12586@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2026/468394402@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2026@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2026@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Can Initial/0-RTT CIDs safely be used for routing? (#2026)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c782f8bb54d0_69ea3f9d03ed45c41537a8"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: igorlord
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak0YgsZNOZMpbKjOqYjeTehXtpRyAkrL2fBMa0 DPdevCnurJ2zrMVDFKqnA1ewusV5dw9Cn4c/5PHKoODPX+WI7hEQKlUKDUuaO2pvLSXMlzvUl/UmHg o226k7ShP3jBP6XDEGe66UbxWdIh8ncwLcMk2KWJUIw+umpGnDi5tutyAItPi3CjI6b8CzLpf0JBq4 o=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/hMsYfJuXTxrA-zXb8yeERY2Icu8>
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: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 18:59:27 -0000

I think the point @MikeBishop is making is a sensible one.  The explicit text that Mike has quoted is implying that servers SHOULD use Client-chosen CID for routing.  After all, this purpose is explicitly stated, without any caveats, right there in the spec.

I would rather see that quoted text removed altogether.  It is enough to state that "_A client SHOULD select an initial Destination Connection ID length long enough to satisfy the minimum size requirements for every QUIC version it supports_". This is accurate and not misleading.

-- 
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/2026#issuecomment-468394402