Re: New Version Notification for draft-dawkins-quic-what-to-do-with-multipath-03.txt

Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 08 January 2021 21:27 UTC

Return-Path: <spencerdawkins.ietf@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 4F6AF3A130D for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 13:27:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
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: 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 J-dTBRtkPwDZ for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 13:27:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb30.google.com (mail-yb1-xb30.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b30]) (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 951B93A130B for <quic@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 13:27:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb30.google.com with SMTP id y4so10687650ybn.3 for <quic@ietf.org>; Fri, 08 Jan 2021 13:27:22 -0800 (PST)
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=LGArI3hY8yuStSrOCyLLSxdW8JlsepglANArgwmDFuU=; b=dnwzAUOLWgJUlCCSaJfajy3suuewrqa4NkYeokq7KKMggVSWL5Nu5oauSweyL0cZ5a 1ol7Bd86B+pEC82ri0eXjkKRkEIsVkTqZXophLzrF2/gp4axnkRwe1Du6O/BJI3u71xw UCtt2wfNBiYldlVx4qvuZ3wezhMpPBlykP4eYDugvt4H2nXSgykxY0Mx77y4R30eyZhN nl+SyrpOHawMfBXG9NnI/4RjuumlTi/Vgl0DWe5LxVP0ARuL32TZYtdr5MLJeHqZLUY9 dAIgmwkwoERB59wpuURo5XU9m2+Zo4VOuYINQc1vO/fK9afcSTJDg+rm4u42qRUVNJRW rTJQ==
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=LGArI3hY8yuStSrOCyLLSxdW8JlsepglANArgwmDFuU=; b=q7K8CYb/aIWU4sYBLVlFhmFgDZvn7HqsXWjtaq+SRW2ZU7tGNv5VOIdMhLeCjCUNz7 CKezSH7ayAczFpz2xymO0jUMCFMGpfSdzF0vikpMDMSgqGUekir3iLyAB4gtc+KOOrUG w214HCQ5YXfnPVqw8NlUcPmIVhyQZwqeCNm8iv8SHsOH8qnxm0GPKiQpzZDUnKkME0Rb aqjFTbxJtYuG5e5/714gP4odG5lH6zQuFFTv4Zb4YCgmJaYvZc9BlAfj3DX2ADbyzbVo kmYjZnmevDlpVOlARj+36XVTb10tr4em+zLvsaF+OJHDYc7UonVFf+d0ku7HgtSsLrZb M7Nw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531sjIAhAy8jsYkr6D80MhgnoF6NdK2u6u10xLuY0rvgnCOpWsxH MGSBn3x4qC2U7sfQ9e9VV4nN1E/g9Xy2KIRxRBE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwiA4tcAjFD3/0K44zuthqq/cz4NwVGXR8maY7gksIJQnnigWfh+bEliLhfU3WnSXiHdvoFdiwEq7vqtacYkgg=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:1182:: with SMTP id 124mr8106274ybr.154.1610141241910; Fri, 08 Jan 2021 13:27:21 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <160998952719.13932.9365244706084056888@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAKKJt-fP8AKK4FmL7jj84OoRYhaJfcQtmsGinKSEkX68ki4bfQ@mail.gmail.com> <E34000E5-CA6A-446F-863B-E065F51F9A96@gmail.com> <593fba51-ca8c-61bf-d234-61b187bf87dc@redbarn.org>
In-Reply-To: <593fba51-ca8c-61bf-d234-61b187bf87dc@redbarn.org>
From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2021 15:26:55 -0600
Message-ID: <CAKKJt-ftntZmvkmUKUoduM-3LcJMRjYmkYPySCsT=NxqPj02yQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-dawkins-quic-what-to-do-with-multipath-03.txt
To: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Mikkel_Fahn=C3=B8e_J=C3=B8rgensen?= <mikkelfj@gmail.com>, IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c32a3405b86a38ad"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/MQoD-jJ32-KZBsTINMbXZK8CUGo>
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: Fri, 08 Jan 2021 21:27:24 -0000

Hi, Paul and Mikkel,

On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 1:46 AM Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> wrote:

>
>
> Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen wrote on 2021-01-07 09:17:
> > ...
> >
> > From a quick read, I believe you have captured many relevant use cases
> > but perhaps the document does not capture the concerns related til NAT
> > translation and firewalls.
> >
> > ...
>
> i'm not sure enterprise concerns such as NAT or firewalls are important
> to this audience. QUIC is policy-immune by design, and those of us who
> operate secure private networks (schools, enterprise, military, police,
> and many homes) are expecting to simply deny UDP and force the use of an
> outbound proxy.
>
> i'd love to be wrong, but section 3 of
> https://quicwg.org/ops-drafts/draft-ietf-quic-manageability.html seems
> clear as to the intended entropy level and that this level really is
> intentional. unfortunately for me as a security private network
> operator, my needs in this regard are the same as russia's.
>

My goal in this draft was to focus on strategies for path selection when
you have two or more validated paths available.

I think that in order to have those paths validated, you already have to
have navigated the potentially twisty maze of NATs and firewall policies.

I recognize that actually getting multiple QUIC paths validated across NATs
and firewalls is important to actual deployments, but I think it's
orthogonal to path selection in a scheduler with multiple paths already
available.

Does that make sense?

And thanks for taking a look at this draft. I know there's a lot of mailing
list traffic with all the ballot e-mail going back and forth!

Best,

Spencer