Re: Consensus on Deploying QUIC v1 with HTTP/3

Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com> Thu, 06 May 2021 15:51 UTC

Return-Path: <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D899F3A26B4; Thu, 6 May 2021 08:51:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.846
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.846 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 TN_5ZdjBbP3t; Thu, 6 May 2021 08:51:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ej1-x632.google.com (mail-ej1-x632.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::632]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39A513A269B; Thu, 6 May 2021 08:51:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ej1-x632.google.com with SMTP id w3so8995178ejc.4; Thu, 06 May 2021 08:51:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=54FcSIy+GskNpjMHkc5/r53YyvUrzPAfQsxi04hVqco=; b=WMvDn0WJJmb1y3sbfISC/Ljoxwk/DMaXDUne3W4ny+0/53GYcaPm1Sys+B6ggioYuV NOBCl8NTo2AiJUYX71L0JsFRHMsRpok4AV5cHjuzYGPDvEaMF5XL0Tv+uyfciArIM+w3 vQvqN8+DHJ0h7AaNVGPc/pipp1AasTmFEBboleoQtHS/YMo5TS5SB5fVcIa6pQQnmfwX +XAv97+999jhF5+szL5JmR+igz0z19Wmc26woGFlGu4vyRDvEQTAJaUoq3NrUgtzq1aB OOV0MYdGQn6WzioVmCvP/ILmninwby2mAwWFsxf3LRbN42k27uYtpJnI1LCU/RiPlAxZ 9nLQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=54FcSIy+GskNpjMHkc5/r53YyvUrzPAfQsxi04hVqco=; b=ItEU3r6mat3W7QmwCrHoS3M9kUkE+FXycA2vJ0B66CYdwk+v2oU6sIvGm+M9hKnmLL TVKgXhIhbRurX2zhpOCb+5tzmds+4DMCbh7FRyIjZ+wADBOmfr8a2LXF4R3P1TtGcHxn QrHl2N5iWRn7J2R1HrKSjOrJsETjFFOt5h0DJc6gWD0rNRysjNVHoSBDR528r8nUz7Oy cEbOA4t1vCX+ODEKt9gLm4cA8acSZOcxsEXICsB81S+ZWWohA4IW2KFd6BVyPRJOV3CF oj9vjS0NvwGfvuwGZkcKaxu6XWzrXD9ym47KJhO4G0tu79niIMsD4GJtNeKIqJ5etxoC 0yrQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530SuHR0I8ZH/jYR2Md1lb6qyCBpHOjfrcT31yH2JX5jPUPf59oG s6rFYTM/SyUd8bp7VFYD/Q0YKsD5fk1zpaHnM0Q=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxm8un2SFQrakGHUsuVqmsFU36UlIcJvDGCXwxMqSggKffZF0Vpd175YGMcx1AJyiq7XxNEN9OYR+745hu60q0=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:3f06:: with SMTP id hq6mr5274405ejc.46.1620316295000; Thu, 06 May 2021 08:51:35 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CALGR9obE-Dbm5Rwmr=h_34vaps1pcv36Jg0MTS_o0mZHEF1FvA@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-fMzMfe1uDbUrWWWwt=0Wv69AqpH-gYFz_0NcKgw2w1Lw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKKJt-fMzMfe1uDbUrWWWwt=0Wv69AqpH-gYFz_0NcKgw2w1Lw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 06 May 2021 16:51:23 +0100
Message-ID: <CALGR9ob1yDh9gZrahtogHcU9Vdo5LkqfDqAzSiX-k8tXfw-weQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Consensus on Deploying QUIC v1 with HTTP/3
To: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>, WG Chairs <quic-chairs@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002ff66d05c1ab492f"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/2AyYIYDIuOjOetdNTa_LWAKOKIo>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Main mailing list of the IETF QUIC working group <quic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 May 2021 15:51:42 -0000

Hi Spencer,

Thanks for sharing.

On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 3:17 PM Spencer Dawkins at IETF <
spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, Lucas,
>
> I am aware that QUIC and HTTP/3 have been deployed at scale with all the
> instrumentation one could hope for when deploying Internet-Drafts, but I
> have to ask - if people identify a (presumably rare) problem using HTTP/3
> ALPN identifier "h3" with QUIC "0x00000001", what do we do then?
>

Speaking as an individual.

There are possibilities for things to go wrong. HTTP has a mild safety by
means of Alt-Svc, its upgrade and fallback mechanism should insulate end
users from problems. QUIC can, however, be used for many applications so
the story isn't complete.

One failure root cause class is due to implementation - those things can
typically be detected and fixed. Another failure root cause class could be
in the QUIC protocol itself. There may be a need to fix such a problem in a
new version and that's partly why the WG is placing energy into the version
negotiation document (draft-ietf-quic-version-negotiation) [1] As I
mentioned up thread, the "h3" ALPN identifier is explicitly linked to only QUIC
0x00000001. Some of the recent version negotiation discussion has touched
on what HTTP/3 ALPN identifier we might use with a new version of QUIC.

So I don't have all the answers but I'm encouraged by the attitude to the
version negotiation work, in anticipation of the need to support QUIC
protocol revisions. Anyone with ideas or suggestions on that topic please
review or contribute to discussion on appropriate list thread or the GitHub
repository https://github.com/quicwg/version-negotiation/issues

Cheers,
Lucas

[1] -
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-quic-version-negotiation