Re: ECN in QUIC connection migration

Eric Kinnear <ekinnear@apple.com> Thu, 01 February 2018 23:01 UTC

Return-Path: <ekinnear@apple.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 B2A4312F280 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 15:01:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.319
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.319 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=apple.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 EwvpE3jZwfi0 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 15:01:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-in5.apple.com (mail-out5.apple.com [17.151.62.27]) (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 76D2D12DA29 for <quic@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 15:01:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=apple.com; s=mailout2048s; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@apple.com; t=1517526096; x=2381439696; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-id:To:Cc:MIME-version:Content-type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-reply-to:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=zN4SVZX1G1GdGY+GU3HSZAG/e3O4eR3rDZarsua5R5M=; b=cs3EuMq1VuThGBaJhRBbJvWb3iW7FFb/BiQKRDKWIxAHGe9q0gjhCjxl88pCq1u5 4+mhf+rMVa96cp51xxZ08iF2bgyzT0pkQ+9UgTx5wcO2AUgYT6xIIEo9OGK9Btos 2j15UPzSJt4YhJFTveUEqG4d9ScE13j3gV4wDlPSvB3+m3H+0trouODsLajNs/nE DhABAkrrh2iUq3Vc0ZRCChcIIGZQ+LD074SbhpB2RpKaIw5H9pcGPmj+HAoKQw/u MGHEUMi2atDCvOi5E+ybisFqUjqfK/l0TyYSSXDiU1aMgAUsm0oOG9a/atv34r2m ClAsZvetC5fL5T1g1agudg==;
Received: from relay5.apple.com (relay5.apple.com [17.128.113.88]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail-in5.apple.com (Apple Secure Mail Relay) with SMTP id D9.13.14264.05C937A5; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 15:01:36 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: 11973e13-066cc9e0000037b8-2d-5a739c50a730
Received: from nwk-mmpp-sz09.apple.com (nwk-mmpp-sz09.apple.com [17.128.115.80]) by relay5.apple.com (Apple SCV relay) with SMTP id F0.91.18983.F4C937A5; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 15:01:36 -0800 (PST)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_P1qNjudSPDzUqiVs46MXRQ)"
Received: from [17.114.153.214] by nwk-mmpp-sz09.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.2.20180122 64bit (built Jan 22 2018)) with ESMTPSA id <0P3H00BUEUMNJJ40@nwk-mmpp-sz09.apple.com>; Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:01:35 -0800 (PST)
Sender: ekinnear@apple.com
From: Eric Kinnear <ekinnear@apple.com>
Message-id: <639A6936-34F2-4C27-973A-EEAE878677FA@apple.com>
Subject: Re: ECN in QUIC connection migration
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:01:34 -0800
In-reply-to: <HE1PR0702MB36252D61A7A51B848B5DA9E7C2FA0@HE1PR0702MB3625.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Cc: QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>, Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com>, "Lubashev, Igor" <ilubashe@akamai.com>, Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>, "De Schepper, Koen (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" <koen.de_schepper@nokia-bell-labs.com>
To: Ingemar Johansson S <ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com>
References: <HE1PR0702MB36252D61A7A51B848B5DA9E7C2FA0@HE1PR0702MB3625.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrKLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUi2FAYoRswpzjK4MlMfovJjbPZLX7e28lq 0dSwgtli5uttLBbHvi1lsuhZwO3A5jH5yAJmj19fr7J5LNhU6nFrxikWjyVLfjJ5NH1bxBbA FsVlk5Kak1mWWqRvl8CVcbm/l7HgZW3F3Ynr2RsY1+d2MXJySAiYSPxbMZuli5GLQ0hgNZPE tp2TWGESjz58YYZIHGSUuN+znxkkwSsgKPFj8j2gDg4OZoEwienHykHCQgLfGCXe7KgEsYUF pCROb7zABGKzCahL/Hm4lh2i1UZi4dObLBA1uhLzfv4Hi7MIqEp8PLGcDWQkp0CyxN4pDiBr mQWeMEq8fbOWGSQuImAl8fayIogpJJAk8XxWEsSVShLTv99mAymXEFjELnHraB/TBEahWUgO nYVwKISpLjFlSi5IBbOAtsSTdxdYIWw1iYW/FzEhiy9gZFvFKJSbmJmjm5lnqpdYUJCTqpec n7uJERRP0+2EdzCeXmV1iFGAg1GJh5dDujhKiDWxrLgy9xCjNAeLkjiveXVRlJBAemJJanZq akFqUXxRaU5q8SFGJg5OqQZGr92iOXuX93wJmnHz3KLArj+ue1dNVw6cdrI782vRZKk7DN0W 9mtuOjMafZjznI2jUuyGyLQv+w60ZyqWK4UZxeYvPSDu9UHhisTdhoRn8yPvVelUf9cXT/j8 7rlydQrLnAq1og1H5r7f3FZ70DFr3YQlFfZJzLyXq7WY+s5dcJNt/1/RXGavxFKckWioxVxU nAgA11psYogCAAA=
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrAIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUi2FAcoBswpzjKoHUdl8XkxtnsFj/v7WS1 aGpYwWwx8/U2Fotj35YyWfQs4HZg85h8ZAGzx6+vV9k8Fmwq9bg14xSLx5IlP5k8mr4tYgtg izK0ScsvKk8sSlEoSi4osVUqzkhMyS+PtzQ2MnVILCjISdVLzs9V0rezSUnNySxLLdK3SzDM uNzfy1jwsrbi7sT17A2M63O7GDk5JARMJB59+MLcxcjFISRwkFHifs9+ZpAEr4CgxI/J91i6 GDk4mAXCJKYfKwcJCwl8Y5R4s6MSxBYWkJI4vfECE4jNJqAu8efhWnaIVhuJhU9vskDU6ErM +/kfLM4ioCrx8cRyNpCRnALJEnunOICsZRZ4wijx9s1aZpC4iICVxNvLiiCmkECSxPNZSRBX KklM/36bbQIj/ywkt81CuA3CVJeYMiUXpIJZQFviybsLrBC2msTC34uYkMUXMLKtYhQoSs1J rDTVgwfYJkZwNBVG7GD8v8zqEKMAB6MSDy+HdHGUEGtiWXFl7iFGCQ5mJRHeK91AId6UxMqq 1KL8+KLSnNTiQ4w+QA9OZJYSTc4HRnpeSbyhsYWxpYmFgYGJpZkJDmElcd4jSkVRQgLpiSWp 2ampBalFMOOYODilGhjVUrXNVBXza97ps+snfeSfdHjRptfpR/6q33K7ztrw0N6B16AtmEFK wdrrivKOFL2jGddMJk8KrTJOfKjH7xTLfEnPUDlZagVzk3S8Ld+F1SLHZmf2KJ5sy3jCrj9v +tZ3TsuvLF7lLDSpyGPZxmmnjmZldjEtUOkK8JPz/MGVukTd+lAspxILMGkZajEXFScCAE1C PWLTAgAA
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/NRcCe-EWgXPpja5IULbiU6vK8Zs>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 01 Feb 2018 23:01:39 -0000

Hi Ingemar, 

This generally looks good to me!
A few questions and observations: 

> There are two unique cases:
> 
> 	• ECN capability check successful at initial connection setup
> 	• ECN capability check failed at initial connection setup

Are these actually any different in terms of action taken by an endpoint?
It seems like on the new network path the endpoint would go through the same process of: (a) verify ECN capability and if successful to whatever degree then (b) run the rest of the ECN machinery as appropriate.

In other words, as long as you allow people to start using ECN upon migration (in other words, to allow starting it after the initial connection establishment), then the specifics for ECN with migration is essentially one statement, which is “do the ECN process on each new network path that you use”. 

> Connection migration has impact on the number of reported CE marked packets. A new connection state with new congestion control state and ECN counters is instantiated at the sender and receiver. The ECN counters MUST start from zero again.

This seems fine to me, it’s inline with the rest of the congestion control/loss recovery state that also needs to be reset for the new path. 

Given that each migration requires at least one exchange of packets at the beginning (at the very least for address validation from the side of the endpoint that didn’t migrate), it seems like that’s an excellent moment to mark the packets and perform the ECN capability detection. Those packets are also likely padded, etc. similar to initial packets since they’re on a previously unused network path. 

I think the current proposed requirement of just using the “first” packets and marking those is sufficient (and good to avoid any requirement as to which frames are contained in those packets), since we are always exchanging packets in both directions immediately after migration. 

This has the added benefit such that any endpoint “probing” possible network paths could include the bits necessary to detect ECN capability on the path being probed, so it could even know before migrating whether or not it would be able to use ECN on that new path. 

Thanks,
Eric



> On Feb 1, 2018, at 3:07 AM, Ingemar Johansson S <ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi
> I have written up different aspects of connection migration and how it plays with ECN.
> https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/wiki/ECN-in-QUIC#transport-draft-connection-migration <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/wiki/ECN-in-QUIC#transport-draft-connection-migration>
>  
> A caveat.. I am a bit unsure about the definition of connection migration . My interpretation is that a client moves to a new IP address due to e.g. a NAT rebind or switch from WiFi to cellular, right ?. Is a new connection instantiated at a connection migration ? 
>  
> /Ingemar
>  
> ==================================
> Ingemar Johansson  M.Sc.
> Master Researcher
>  
> Ericsson Research
> Network Protocols & E2E Performance
> Labratoriegränd 11
> 971 28, Luleå, Sweden
> Phone +46-1071 43042
> SMS/MMS +46-73 078 3289
> ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com <mailto:ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com>
> www.ericsson.com <x-msg://316/www.ericsson.com>
>  
>                  You can't start a fire
>   Worrying 'bout your little world falling apart
>                Bruce Springsteen
> ==================================