IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: What to do about multipath in QUIC

Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen <mikkelfj@gmail.com> Mon, 16 November 2020 18:19 UTC

Return-Path: <mikkelfj@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 A53743A136D for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 10:19:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 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_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 c7GgvBLAxweb for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 10:19:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb33.google.com (mail-yb1-xb33.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b33]) (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 6DC803A11BD for <quic@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 10:19:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb33.google.com with SMTP id o71so16194713ybc.2 for <quic@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 10:19:07 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=P4WCRSri17dASKcxu83TuT3jhICckE4iHkq1qXoUqeU=; b=BS0xwSWpKUdWVoAqedzrynEjleSgiVpTQ+QROkycxZKU/esSNYUnntzvAM5RVUrFpP EUaTNsE1CZv8vYrEQSbzS93qrlVzY2kyZQoi7+87k3/ui8GfCbGtgEJsZ/bsFGsBUKWg ENI9sOeLzXhxw6bNzn/7FnmufR1MXe9ARtwDElay5OdgWpjW8sHcbr7ru6cFmgDnfdC4 1fGOPrNxWdEgaT+SWfoGkMpMZGfJ/7ZFGKitmQYLWEMxAS9Lm+O2OfRn4eTBvnitbAtW vzlvFgEwLKccVPg9ATcSxtMWsKQqGksuNb4I/EeE3FvhoZM1AfkiQqzYy7A0xo0aoWjr tJrQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=P4WCRSri17dASKcxu83TuT3jhICckE4iHkq1qXoUqeU=; b=jvkzVmpksLLx1VN9RSHGQB/Esoq9spULb1WvMQsZGtXS4pXtOH64QGd4pmNXeJwUKb nSla949qNEApUce+ZMbEoEcNHW19kZr/rC9a0/bRIW3nuzvrAi3r91rntTyNp1zuylex 9lxLzQoTDFAxZpKjUX9iB222rYwoocUKxjKuXXQMcWzuZpGmWWkAn4RMq6LMwfq/SZ7m /ceVj13T6cIAeXh6/Z6gEjerTGUf6B7Br9oQ4qmCJG6BNtbKo/LMA0+AB/GpGR+sZ+Nu EeukCvn7qxW65PWDBVnXtxcmyt8Kzj8htRLZQ89p1fQSVBK4aTh65Wct6/tBwtS883hh /qRA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Gn1qKbHbbMLhu8hE5uwCZ6setR7/tegs0xua5eQtliVvZbDlB tIvcH3DvVoC6CL/2mOnhTFzAppyco7CMlDH2Z7s=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw6+Krk7e9hhi5wkeafVFWr6RMUikSzMu7gAq/DOiOQLqXAgHJ7EHiSkc6t4h1o1h/wCllISDhkxLRcMqAZhrs=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:7cc2:: with SMTP id x185mr18411441ybc.263.1605550746581; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 10:19:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 10:19:06 -0800
From: Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen <mikkelfj@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 10:19:06 -0800
Message-ID: <CAN1APdeyfWNmWH16+yfOMUc_OnbgrsYnVtS=AjUAwjxWi9uf=g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: What to do about multipath in QUIC
To: Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>, Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>, quic@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000eb3f8805b43d6916"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/6SViaWgCehKQMdcY3RAm4U-0VIs>
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: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 18:19:09 -0000

Why not use the connection ID for encoding the PN?

Mikkel

On 16 November 2020 at 19.12.02, Christian Huitema (huitema@huitema.net)
wrote:

Kazuho,

You are proposing to use a transform, in which the AEAD "sequence" is
the conjunction of a sequence number space identifier and the number
within that space. I agree that doing that solves the uniqueness
requirement, but I have two concerns.

First, your original proposal allocates just 2 bits for the sequence
number space identifier. You observe that the sequence number is encoded
as a varint, which can only encode 62 bits of value, and thus we can
reuse the two high order bits to encode a number space identifier. But
what happens if the connection uses more than 4 number spaces?

Second, we have a synchronization issue. At what point do nodes start
using the "path-specific" number space? If we want to be robust, don't
we need to encode a number space identifier in the packet header?

-- Christian Huitema

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status