Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] 5tuple routing (#3536)

Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com> Wed, 29 April 2020 01:44 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 9FAC53A0A78 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 18:44:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.1 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_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, 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 0MIs6WaKglz2 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 18:44:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-20.smtp.github.com (out-20.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.203]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 672DA3A0A74 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 18:44:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-fa7043e.ash1-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-fa7043e.ash1-iad.github.net [10.56.109.45]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A51A8C0440 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 18:44:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1588124694; bh=ZwUox5iBlx0nHsFbF/G5ZffnGvjcJYRxGltQ3wnREIc=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=AbZZfmdXnbmHa7i8XQVZcBTdxU1WzKAWErD4GGdq6pTRPI2ku4RNwx52i9wOjBsBH G9+ZFwmJCmPSv65Vbfmh2gGSeb9dFj1XxNdOyq76HknvRNi6CEkczxfaVq3562wH9F BtLhwuCxjGfTg9vIuwdkZvGB7fr//jKsWMEWalyE=
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 18:44:54 -0700
From: Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK26X6O6PQ32T26SEAV4WS6RNEVBNHHCFYX2PM@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3536/review/402270209@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3536@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3536@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] 5tuple routing (#3536)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5ea8dc1638841_5f963f957b6cd964824a0"; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: martinthomson
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/sEE6fXg1wOoGBdrF7wriwbtu47U>
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: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 01:44:58 -0000

@martinthomson commented on this pull request.

I'm sure that this is now basically unrecognizable...

> @@ -1156,6 +1156,34 @@ SHOULD ignore any such packets.
 
 Servers MUST drop incoming packets under all other circumstances.
 
+### Considerations for 5-tuple routing architectures

```suggestion
### Considerations for Simple Load Balancers
```

> +* If servers can use other dedicated server IP addresses or ports than
+the one that the client is initiating connections to, they could use the
+preferred_address transport parameter to request that clients move
+connections to these dedicated addresses. Note that clients could
+choose not to use the preferred address.

```suggestion
* If servers can use a dedicated server IP address or port, other than the one
that the client is initially connects to, they could use the preferred_address
transport parameter to request that clients move connections to a dedicated
address. Note that clients could choose not to use the preferred address.
```

> +could result in packets being forwarded to the wrong server. Such a server
+deployment could use one of the following methods for connection continuity
+when a client's address changes.
+
+* Servers could use an out-of-band mechanism to forward packets to the correct
+server based on Connection ID.
+
+* If servers can use other dedicated server IP addresses or ports than
+the one that the client is initiating connections to, they could use the
+preferred_address transport parameter to request that clients move
+connections to these dedicated addresses. Note that clients could
+choose not to use the preferred address.
+
+A server in a deployment that does not implement a solution to
+maintain connection continuity during connection migration
+SHOULD disallow it via the disable_active_migration transport

```suggestion
SHOULD disallow migration using the disable_active_migration transport
```

> +Server deployments that use such load balancing might allow for
+creation of a stateless reset oracle, and should therefore follow the
+guidelines in {{reset-oracle}}.

Might as well just reiterate the existing requirement instead:

```suggestion
Server deployments that use this simple form of load balancing MUST avoid the
creation of a stateless reset oracle; see {{reset-oracle}}.
```

Fewer words, too.

-- 
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/3536#pullrequestreview-402270209