IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Do I need to reset congestion info when the port changes? (#3842)

ianswett <notifications@github.com> Tue, 14 July 2020 18:13 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@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 697F43A0970 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:13:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.483
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.483 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, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.618, 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 zaFKbw9Ad5pu for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:13:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-24.smtp.github.com (out-24.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.207]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0AF7D3A096B for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:13:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-3a0df0f.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-3a0df0f.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.25.92]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 546126A1BFF for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:13:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1594750393; bh=WVbAIFYnfxnToJdHyYQ41132LKdvyjEucIuvdp2QJ+U=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=t1PgZ+Nwr8StAaNUYLlfysROaHkT+3DKTFBft0G30Z9GKR0MxviRGMsrmv3w77Kv3 oECKgHsT/z2nSZEFHHaTsiFgA8EApum0FLwAcfawWqhoPG+/BvdcxKXWfDmJHKV7Va f8BKTumSieZ0hv0L8eKb9hAOhseoQFlTWHW+ljSc=
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:13:13 -0700
From: ianswett <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJKZGXTKBGXLME7AW2NN5DHLLTEVBNHHCN2JJGQ@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3842/658332505@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3842@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3842@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Do I need to reset congestion info when the port changes? (#3842)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5f0df5b9468f0_26003fc6672cd9641774e"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ianswett
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/rV96XO3FaBtTS0ai82ak-nWnEYk>
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: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 18:13:15 -0000

@nharper pointed me to this text, which could add confustion on this point.

> Not all changes of peer address are intentional, or active, migrations. The peer could experience NAT rebinding: a change of address due to a middlebox, usually a NAT, allocating a new outgoing port or even a new outgoing IP address for a flow. An endpoint MUST perform path validation ({{migrate-validate}}) if it detects any change to a peer's address, unless it has previously validated that address.
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/blob/master/draft-ietf-quic-transport.md#connection-migration-migration

My current reading is that you don't have to reset the congestion controller if you're pretty sure it's a NAT rebind, but you still need to perform path validation.  Is that correct?

-- 
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/3842#issuecomment-658332505

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email