Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 01:08:19 -0800
From: Jana Iyengar <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts
 <reply+0166e4abfc1978f078440283bcf8f492de9994eb90c063b992cf00000001186fc30392a169ce182bb556@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2399/review/199485645@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2399@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2399@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Ipv6 flow label (#2399)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="--==_mimepart_5c58010389923_5f3c3f94692d45b42105f";
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/oc2N-uodmIzb0gU8ESUCJ0Bl8sQ>


----==_mimepart_5c58010389923_5f3c3f94692d45b42105f
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

janaiyengar commented on this pull request.



> @@ -2203,6 +2203,21 @@ address before path validation is complete.
 A client that migrates to a new address SHOULD use a preferred address from the
 same address family for the server.
 
+## Use of IPv6 Flow-Label and Migration {#ipv6-flow-label}
+
+Endpoints that send data using IPv6 SHOULD apply an IPv6 flow label
+in compliance with {{!RFC6437}}, unless the local API does not allow
+setting this parameter.
+
+The IPv6 flow label SHOULD be a pseudo-random function of the source
+and destination addresses, source and destination UDP ports, and the destination
+CID. The flow label generation MUST be designed to minimize the chances of
+linkability with a previously used flow label, as this would enable correlating
+activity on multiple paths (see {{migration-linkability}}).
+
+A possible implementation is to compute the flow label as a one way

```suggestion
A possible implementation is to compute the flow label as a one-way
```

-- 
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/2399#pullrequestreview-199485645
----==_mimepart_5c58010389923_5f3c3f94692d45b42105f
Content-Type: text/html;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p><b>@janaiyengar</b> commented on this pull request.</p>=0D
=0D
<hr>=0D
=0D
<p>In <a href=3D"https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2399#discussi=
on_r253387190">draft-ietf-quic-transport.md</a>:</p>=0D
<pre style=3D'color:#555'>&gt; @@ -2203,6 +2203,21 @@ address before path=
 validation is complete.=0D
 A client that migrates to a new address SHOULD use a preferred address f=
rom the=0D
 same address family for the server.=0D
 =0D
+## Use of IPv6 Flow-Label and Migration {#ipv6-flow-label}=0D
+=0D
+Endpoints that send data using IPv6 SHOULD apply an IPv6 flow label=0D
+in compliance with {{!RFC6437}}, unless the local API does not allow=0D
+setting this parameter.=0D
+=0D
+The IPv6 flow label SHOULD be a pseudo-random function of the source=0D
+and destination addresses, source and destination UDP ports, and the des=
tination=0D
+CID. The flow label generation MUST be designed to minimize the chances =
of=0D
+linkability with a previously used flow label, as this would enable corr=
elating=0D
+activity on multiple paths (see {{migration-linkability}}).=0D
+=0D
+A possible implementation is to compute the flow label as a one way=0D
</pre>=0D
=E2=AC=87=EF=B8=8F Suggested change=0D
<pre style=3D"color: #555">-A possible implementation is to compute the f=
low label as a one way=0D
+A possible implementation is to compute the flow label as a one-way=0D
</pre>=0D
=0D
=0D
<p style=3D"font-size:small;-webkit-text-size-adjust:none;color:#666;">&m=
dash;<br />You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thre=
ad.<br />Reply to this email directly, <a href=3D"https://github.com/quic=
wg/base-drafts/pull/2399#pullrequestreview-199485645">view it on GitHub</=
a>, or <a href=3D"https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AWbkq=
wHNfMLc5hTvMM1IRhk-1SknprjBks5vJ_iDgaJpZM4adf_K">mute the thread</a>.<img=
 src=3D"https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AWbkq6CEAoZ5t6j_CFaH2L_3U=
ORah8loks5vJ_iDgaJpZM4adf_K.gif" height=3D"1" width=3D"1" alt=3D"" /></p>=
=0D
<script type=3D"application/json" data-scope=3D"inboxmarkup">{"api_versio=
n":"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":"http=
s://github.githubassets.com/images/email/message_cards/header.png","avata=
r_image_url":"https://github.githubassets.com/images/email/message_cards/=
avatar.png","action":{"name":"Open in GitHub","url":"https://github.com/q=
uicwg/base-drafts"}},"updates":{"snippets":[{"icon":"PERSON","message":"@=
janaiyengar commented on #2399"}],"action":{"name":"View Pull Request","u=
rl":"https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2399#pullrequestreview-19=
9485645"}}}</script>=0D
<script type=3D"application/ld+json">[=0D
{=0D
"@context": "http://schema.org",=0D
"@type": "EmailMessage",=0D
"potentialAction": {=0D
"@type": "ViewAction",=0D
"target": "https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2399#pullrequestrev=
iew-199485645",=0D
"url": "https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2399#pullrequestreview=
-199485645",=0D
"name": "View Pull Request"=0D
},=0D
"description": "View this Pull Request on GitHub",=0D
"publisher": {=0D
"@type": "Organization",=0D
"name": "GitHub",=0D
"url": "https://github.com"=0D
}=0D
}=0D
]</script>=

----==_mimepart_5c58010389923_5f3c3f94692d45b42105f--