Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] NEW_TOKEN should be symmetric (#2760)

ekr <> Sat, 01 June 2019 23:05 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4F081200D6 for <>; Sat, 1 Jun 2019 16:05:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.391
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.391 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ibjt7_cLMClf for <>; Sat, 1 Jun 2019 16:05:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D392120045 for <>; Sat, 1 Jun 2019 16:05:38 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2019 16:05:37 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1559430337; bh=13XQtKUV9xOb1vpZcNacVIj+4KBcY2AAkuyH/zCNYPM=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=rsMXc+F9B9IOitkAxxjNs26EkrOiqPEyrYQ1huoOO4Dpy2Vsv723vw46zATYU6NC1 69ZljhIAqbY7jPCQzq487pomI0xfIIU9BlyjQzGBZqXRpitscr1HmSbR2vbfozuJf9 nZlENzWzPLtxX29YvqZO5g+Dhml2zLpvcj1xd12A=
From: ekr <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2760/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] NEW_TOKEN should be symmetric (#2760)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5cf304c1590c2_7de53f97a8ccd95c5635a6"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ekr
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2019 23:05:40 -0000

I'm skeptical of the value of this change.

Any P2P application where the peers are end-user machines is unlikely to need NEW_TOKEN because it will need ICE or something similar for NAT hole punching and that already gives you a liveness check (as well as an RTT estimate) so you don't need NEW_TOKEN. So, this is then limited to P2P protocols where the peers are actually Internet servers that can adopt either role (e.g., SMTP). Those protocols generally don't seem to have super-high latency concerns, so this doesn't seem like it's going to add a lot of value.

I agree with Kazuho that it would be better to not do this in v1.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: