Re: New Version Notification for draft-duke-quic-natsupp-00.txt

Mirja Kuehlewind <mirja.kuehlewind@ericsson.com> Wed, 29 January 2020 09:28 UTC

Return-Path: <mirja.kuehlewind@ericsson.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 2F50C12026E for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 01:28:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.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 dTNRTYa9qfoW for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 01:28:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from EUR03-VE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr50083.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.5.83]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4AE00120130 for <quic@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 01:28:36 -0800 (PST)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=hUE1FtGBdpRHEwGQZOYyLfpAawlsnG1kn/GFA1bu+jpRPSHyqDSblDJbvinQhslanw1jzZ4UIJYH1cmHX1ms9eZg3Yl9M0Oh4rpIHpSLhhND/sF/4NzqogC23zs0Z+QHW3iCUVC9e2R3trNJm86KE7CRwhzCItFJrFyplL1FQAKITA5Wv3C3Mkc9bNE62ILsXwmrDlpBAj2f3wNV9BAczv96y6CTSBgL+IIQNEcIqEZfTMxMu3iiNdPlvDud5LEJnbNeKfhvfyo5kkHIEgdNN3XULehrPloJ117FiQCVNL9iB7mCFJOel/gn4gMCnNJG+DpSAwvtsl7142TUSecIcQ==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=0oArlgu0Hmc38Ko9wvjn6IMI1Q/4E64482/soMBTuss=; b=S4CDJ3JTOTNVXLAdjUoa960wbgOVupheWSzb6YTOizx0ff66szp5iyPrOjvPciTd6WVMJh9W2AIYiOSApYGK1Xtpzdk29ietTQskHK/0RvnUcUqCWBSU5QmBI6qRz5rG5QcaAJGILsOWKuk/M2GR918APyJf1eNqBKq9jOlXo2rxKnXL87KPtCVA6M6gSO0l6oaVvy1bejTYx9s/UOTMErKSPJdUJxM3vhDutuHzd+cKj+Nz34/djE+JUfyx4ICZHn5LzxImoHHctYxUqPEM2WMMDBRVXp9ubtRGpsLbieTly24iTlEJ2Kpy4b1ATVqfLKa3eLNthk5lg9wo9riFsQ==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ericsson.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ericsson.com; dkim=pass header.d=ericsson.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=0oArlgu0Hmc38Ko9wvjn6IMI1Q/4E64482/soMBTuss=; b=ZJWx/T/edrU/upS44qFCpAxuW1m1zZkkL97nt81DwRqNIGFteOQ0oC7sSEH6tXha+ZgnNkvH8MbTd4pUH09qnpRAFUhiAoXHDbAQKBRGIcBngvNxFRJKjoRDFxSnJMKZSjDGeK5f3qW1zZ6bmPNyUqsyU+/kkSNPu/FA8lo52bM=
Received: from AM0PR07MB4691.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (52.135.149.158) by AM0PR07MB4945.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (20.178.18.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2686.12; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 09:28:34 +0000
Received: from AM0PR07MB4691.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::4879:46ae:16e:f5b7]) by AM0PR07MB4691.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::4879:46ae:16e:f5b7%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2686.025; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 09:28:33 +0000
From: Mirja Kuehlewind <mirja.kuehlewind@ericsson.com>
To: Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>, IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-duke-quic-natsupp-00.txt
Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-duke-quic-natsupp-00.txt
Thread-Index: AQHV1gjboi/pVkkeTEm5AkAzYIUU46gBcaSA
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2020 09:28:33 +0000
Message-ID: <FCCC853A-2984-4823-AB67-71DA0A13E4A0@ericsson.com>
References: <157470946896.14159.17248985824634821547.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAM4esxTPb1p_mH4eOpj62K0hVd0c5S50UC=rSbVqe=1bRXyJ0g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAM4esxTPb1p_mH4eOpj62K0hVd0c5S50UC=rSbVqe=1bRXyJ0g@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-GB
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=mirja.kuehlewind@ericsson.com;
x-originating-ip: [192.176.1.97]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 426953fb-5adc-4319-0da6-08d7a49d9c8d
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: AM0PR07MB4945:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <AM0PR07MB49456FBA737E2EE7611DE20BF4050@AM0PR07MB4945.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508;
x-forefront-prvs: 02973C87BC
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(136003)(366004)(39860400002)(396003)(346002)(376002)(199004)(189003)(66446008)(66556008)(66476007)(66946007)(6486002)(76116006)(2616005)(110136005)(64756008)(8676002)(91956017)(4001150100001)(316002)(2906002)(6512007)(36756003)(33656002)(186003)(478600001)(8936002)(26005)(81156014)(66574012)(44832011)(15650500001)(81166006)(5660300002)(6506007)(966005)(86362001)(71200400001)(53546011); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:AM0PR07MB4945; H:AM0PR07MB4691.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: ericsson.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: WNU8+1JKZ24tw/dA2qnfOLCe7SQrk0lXmRMqfdp/Xskd3GR0Byc+UGJgb+QV5SB1CDGPMSIPC/4x6LGZPqz4e9VjeUYoQRwVzSJ8Nj3g2zUaPwkbG/FgbxHgEhpNKE9sfD1ARFneWt5OTpyXwhzVjg==
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_FCCC853A29844823AB6771DA0A13E4A0ericssoncom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 426953fb-5adc-4319-0da6-08d7a49d9c8d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 29 Jan 2020 09:28:33.8405 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: gqBESTaqXASCY8QsLD86UBU78Cm9NxigzjouhwDDD+Xwz8tX4cE8VnxPFYtEFXt9QpdzXkasZHYnhez6hJDdKyex8vIbl9+OSswZi/J7Qm0=
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM0PR07MB4945
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/7KkgO7o_bz7jYkUMG3QcLFu7sP8>
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: Wed, 29 Jan 2020 09:28:39 -0000

Hi Martin,

thanks for writing this up. I have two questions and a comment.

This part in section 4.1:
   “Therefore, leveraging Connection IDs will cause sudden connection
   breakage when an incoming packet uses CIDs with no clear mapping.”
Not sure I understand this correctly but would a NAT simply assign a new port/address when a new CID shows up..? Why would that break connectivity? Or what do you mean with that?

Regarding section 4.2:
You basically say that changing the port/address might break 4-tuple routing on the other end. But wouldn’t mean that any NAT rebinding would break connectivity and that’s a problem by the other end that should be solved there?

I think the most important part of the document is the last paragraph in section 4.2. I’d recommend to put that in an own section. However, I’m actually not convinced about the other two points (above). If that is the only point we would need to make, maybe that’s also something to put in the manageability document.

Mirja


From: QUIC <quic-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
Date: Tuesday, 28. January 2020 at 19:29
To: IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
Subject: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-duke-quic-natsupp-00.txt

At Gorry's suggestion, I took the NAT recommendations and put them in a short draft that NAT guys are more likely to read. If this seems extraneous, I'm happy to get that feedback.

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org<mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org>>
Date: Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:17 AM
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-duke-quic-natsupp-00.txt
To: Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com<mailto:martin.h.duke@gmail.com>>



A new version of I-D, draft-duke-quic-natsupp-00.txt
has been successfully submitted by Martin Duke and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:           draft-duke-quic-natsupp
Revision:       00
Title:          Network Address Translation Support for QUIC
Document date:  2019-11-25
Group:          Individual Submission
Pages:          5
URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-duke-quic-natsupp-00.txt
Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-duke-quic-natsupp/
Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-duke-quic-natsupp-00
Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-duke-quic-natsupp


Abstract:
   Network Address Translators (NATs) are widely deployed to share
   scarce public IPv4 addresses among mutiple end hosts.  They overwrite
   IP addresses and ports in IP packets to do so.  QUIC is a protocol on
   top of UDP that provides transport-like services.  QUIC is better-
   behaved in the presence of NATs than older protocols, and existing
   UDP NATs should operate without incident if unmodified.  QUIC offers
   additional features that may tempt NAT implementers as potential
   optimizations.  However, in practice, leveraging these features will
   lead to new connection failure modes and security vulnerabilities.




Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org<http://tools.ietf.org>.

The IETF Secretariat