Re: New Plaintext QUIC-LB Design

Martin Duke <> Tue, 12 January 2021 01:22 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E44B3A033F for <>; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 17:22:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BEwRV7E7dIhr for <>; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 17:22:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB5283A02BD for <>; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 17:22:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id t3so1313665ilh.9 for <>; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 17:22:56 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=3iAUnEpKc8tPNnrJ4Q8Tw/wnnPZT62E40zM3nIDmJuQ=; b=GYtABIh8HcD/k9PRfuIUFQ1vWqM1NsPhxpSBYFzXCTw8ZORxLYU1P4aZ7oQVyzyi5A LrQROX7PnLH9e3XoArXvlgZIS12M8ZZJrbkN5DN4znQN3l4pIWCuHsr+kgaDVbfYokVa d3IFyGunbG9JFVZ4MRLzloedgCdgQH+KMkcFLbi76H27+2GGPjVT1FtMQGuiWFuc2f94 UjYR5ly50ZEDQt2eK5ktmNf+Rudrqnh5NzK/kmkF4gLN8tlajB+V/ClqNd2UU7QeS05E z5oGL+2anrGkOviHMKQq88jaqNNElOCS110y1vyvzAqKdA3Un9Li8Y2kkCFB2E7DtH4k WCBw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=3iAUnEpKc8tPNnrJ4Q8Tw/wnnPZT62E40zM3nIDmJuQ=; b=myV+wpneZouobmu03ZJNpXBK/vmi8bje8VTak7R4AQV4sfg/TKFNfjkxq/GET+JQ/r 4ANDUtA+8MTUfHJ27pF+YK7zfCyDcB9gOnq/gsBV8n7hAPvpaVay4PyJVKcYdgPsBBkZ O9Kwreg2tZ3ax4KSh0AaGvTTk4AVLwkfVn7Lrj3yZZbTIqvJ0FdXLPxK9TAUjO3ZjqQo 30wNB6rpBjZe18KibkBkGThtTQiemM6ir8dvlIpUE9N2z4QaWOhPUAHNF/GR2Vtw8yaR UXPnLqLAWnOZvu4cd0BHVbzQAarT12VcUhxt6g2hKFz0wsW9Jdtz6NN8+ddV3PS+p+Vm N69g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530IcRTNi+NPWP2QejyizSLIRksSMz19GeOtrDtyNgttzBnN+Wx0 VLdBh26Fg3HvuQkxQkTPITAwN4F10vkclspI0rMVgjNk+TM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJydiPwGnwFsIfTj5ZN21r5oQ2YmKiA/+IevRbxK/7ukeQEHmfNe3XzYLV/dZmdBMHB6y+dNNr3yVNXWmI3p9Gs=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:68b:: with SMTP id o11mr1689235ils.237.1610414576046; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 17:22:56 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Martin Duke <>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 17:22:44 -0800
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: New Plaintext QUIC-LB Design
To: Christian Huitema <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000bf194205b8a9dced"
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Main mailing list of the IETF QUIC working group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2021 01:22:59 -0000

Perhaps I should make some edits for clarity!

On Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 16:52 Christian Huitema <> wrote:

> I am looking at the text of section 4.2, and I am not sure how I would
> implement that. What should be the value of the config rotation bits in CID
> created by the server?
Any config includes the corresponding CR bits, and when generating the CID
it would use those bits.

The confusing part is that, for this algorithm, a usable SID has to be
extracted from any CID, hence all the weird stuff about CIDs with undefined

Aside from that, it's like PCID: any server-generated CID uses the CR bits
in the config, optional length encoding, SID, server-use octets.

Should the 6 other bits in the first octet be set to a CID Len or to a
> random value?
It depends on the rest of the config, as with the other algorithms.

> Issss the timer set when the server ID is first added to the table, or is
> the timer reset each time a packet is received with that CID? In the latter
> case, is it reset when any packet is received, or only when a "first
> initial" packet is received?
When any packet is received with that SID (not CID), the expiration is

> -- Christian Huitema
> On 1/11/2021 4:14 PM, Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen wrote:
> Sorry, the following text is out of context - it was a suggestion that I
> decided not to persue.
> On 12 Jan 2021, at 01.10, Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen <>
> wrote:
> If the DCID is not understood by the LB, the LB chooses a random target
> server but does not store any state. The expectation being that the server
> will assign its own DCID on the return path.
> The LB will understand how to route the server assigned DCID. The problem
> being that this generally requires shared state - which Low-Config aims to
> avoid in exchange of local state.