From nobody Mon Aug 24 02:18:12 2020 Return-Path: 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 851BA3A0BB8 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 02:18:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.081 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.081 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.282, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, 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 hciShOhONSga for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 02:18:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out-25.smtp.github.com (out-25.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.208]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6EB2F3A0BA4 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 02:18:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from github-lowworker-ca235ff.ash1-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-ca235ff.ash1-iad.github.net [10.56.110.15]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8723E84059B for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 02:18:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1598260689; bh=bdd+omUZjhRs+SiIhd8fnbLr1ZnG6VIdJzLrsBGFYfI=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=LrlzCU/Q6B4MjK4xbgC9py99nvUQbdgCb0Cd9QqkRgcqvXSybeb7BVZL9jkqifMtL HbW3SdIVLHkn7rbO7jHCN4UuTEHZ9P2rX0H5ZNHKfhhJd2P69/xldkaA09ZsU0JRmN 1sFiho4k2BsocIjXo7VQJRp09nwVkXBz2F96k2Hg= Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 02:18:09 -0700 From: Gorry Fairhurst Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts To: quicwg/base-drafts Cc: Subscribed Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Revalidation for ECN (#4037) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5f4385d176be1_3d7e1964240073"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: gorryfair X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org Archived-At: X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org 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, 24 Aug 2020 09:18:12 -0000 ----==_mimepart_5f4385d176be1_3d7e1964240073 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit @gorryfair commented on this pull request. > @@ -3892,6 +3889,7 @@ errors are detected. Endpoints validate ECN for packets sent on each network path independently. An endpoint thus validates ECN on new connection establishment, when switching to a server's preferred address, and on active connection migration to a new path. +If validation fails, an endpoint could also periodically attempt validation. To be clear: I suggest we keep the text that says: "An endpoint validates the use of ECN on the path, both during connection establishment and when migrating to a new path ({{migration}})." ... Although the simplest way to do this is to monitor an increase in the ECN counters reported. I suspect there have been too many threads/issues related to ECN text (some have diverged and some concluded with no action) and those people (me included) involved should now read a clean version of the ECN text. I do not expect this text to be hard to finalise. -- 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/4037#discussion_r475453977 ----==_mimepart_5f4385d176be1_3d7e1964240073 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

@gorryfair commented on this pull request.

In draft-ietf-quic-transport.md:

> @@ -3892,6 +3889,7 @@ errors are detected.
 Endpoints validate ECN for packets sent on each network path independently.  An
 endpoint thus validates ECN on new connection establishment, when switching to a
 server's preferred address, and on active connection migration to a new path.
+If validation fails, an endpoint could also periodically attempt validation.

To be clear: I suggest we keep the text that says: "An endpoint validates the use of ECN on the path, both during connection establishment and when migrating to a new path ({{migration}})."

... Although the simplest way to do this is to monitor an increase in the ECN counters reported.

I suspect there have been too many threads/issues related to ECN text (some have diverged and some concluded with no action) and those people (me included) involved should now read a clean version of the ECN text. I do not expect this text to be hard to finalise.

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

----==_mimepart_5f4385d176be1_3d7e1964240073--