[quicwg/base-drafts] disable_active_migration with SPA (#3765)

[Igor Lubashev <[e-mail]>]

Issue #3608 by @MikeBishop was about deployments where migration with the handshake address was problematic, but migration with server preffered_address (SPA) was ok.

However, there are deployments where servers still have a preferred address, but client migration using either server address is not likely to work well,

For example, a server is a backend in front of a load balancer (and hence wants to use a prefered address that does not go via the load balancer for improved performance and reliability).  However, the server is in a network location that is unlikely to be accessible or be a logical choice when changing to a different network attachment provider.

So it is not a matter of "disambiguating connections using CIDs" (_as posed by @kazuho in response to @DavidSchinazi in https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3608#issuecomment-631869936_), but it is a matter of server's network location.

With #3670 PR, how is such server able to provide a SPA and still request that clients do not attempt an active migration after switching to SPA (occasional NAT rebidings are fine; it is changes to another network attachment provider -- active migrations -- that are not ok)?

-- 
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/3765