Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Address validation for connection migration (#732)

[Martin Thomson <[e-mail]>]

martinthomson commented on this pull request.



> @@ -1351,6 +1355,14 @@ connection when they move networks.  This includes state that can be hard to
 recover such as outstanding requests, which might otherwise be lost with no easy
 way to retry them.
 
+An endpoint that receives packets that contain a source IP address and port that

I agree, we don't know and we should discuss.  But this PR addresses problems with use of new paths that can't otherwise be addressed.  I agree with you that this isn't a great design, it's probably even terrible, but a good design will take time.  You aren't committing to this design though.  I would prefer to see this merged, while recognizing that it is bad in certain specific ways (I don't agree that this is so bad that the protocol will break, however).  I will even open the issue that explains the shortcoming of this design if we merge this.

-- 
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/732#discussion_r145019630