Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Required state for retaining unacked RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frames is unbound (#3509)

Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com> Mon, 30 March 2020 03:48 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 015423A09C3 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Mar 2020 20:48:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 TYVZlNQFE4C4 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Mar 2020 20:48:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-27.smtp.github.com (out-27.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D96243A09BE for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Sun, 29 Mar 2020 20:48:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-c53a806.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-c53a806.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.23.45]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2716E004E for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Sun, 29 Mar 2020 20:48:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1585540106; bh=JGxebw0TPapO0fPS8qQM970XTF5cp1xH9WAFovLXpXE=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=ShLx8F3MLpLgM4VdY481wx1QwumCtaztwIcXkFMWIjJfv2Jyz4WXKUq3tMiHsHNn0 NyqZobNq+zFCpE7ehcZtR+elYddfDNUfheBHVk9WV77THzPPuLCzSJI+4O/MB+nOyw CtLJb2V96ZZuwiSboN6RbygE1OwIibYiJbLi4k8c=
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2020 20:48:26 -0700
From: Martin Thomson <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK627TPFYKYQIS624N54RVGQVEVBNHHCFAMG5E@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3509/605767369@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3509@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3509@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Required state for retaining unacked RETIRE_CONNECTION_ID frames is unbound (#3509)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e816c0ab2671_37dd3fa2d22cd968734618"; 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/swUOQJ05N24FicamhCMxEiqodEs>
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: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 03:48:30 -0000

I know that you have characterized this as "leaky", but I'm not sure that I understand exactly what is being leaked.  Nothing is lost in #3547, except that the endpoint requesting retirement has to tolerate a potentially extended period without old connection IDs being retired.

In case this helps, I have no big preference between #3547 and #3550.  There is a certain elegance to #3550 that might tip me toward that, but it is slightly more disruptive.

I prefer either of those to the more disruptive change in #3553, which also has the downside of strongly encouraging connection ID changes in order to preserve a clean separation between active and retired.  #3553 doesn't force you to drop old connection IDs.  However, the encoding of the frame is just too complicated for me to accept.  I would prefer forcing a clean separation than having a complex encoding like this.

#3548 is a non-starter for me for the reasons stated.

-- 
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/3509#issuecomment-605767369