Re: Some late comments on draft-ietf-quic-load-balancers
James <james.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 12 March 2021 13:19 UTC
Return-Path: <james.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 C4D313A0CE1 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 05:19:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 3sb0XgvGJb5G for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 05:19:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ed1-x529.google.com (mail-ed1-x529.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::529]) (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 552793A0CD9 for <quic@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 05:19:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ed1-x529.google.com with SMTP id u4so7892169edv.9 for <quic@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 05:19:06 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=8xgavnCgXauasD69OtwwlNfnaX4YL02PFWB4aJMGxQA=; b=JToKDCdnhSoUXJhjb8/uuRGlcdNaElvYnXqvLRxABPF/TBg1T87PCOiuj1VHKval8l NxpWlxjXSeHaFiSAD54VgXiZwsFQKPXhF2NyN9pzIYhu/Srrti/WSuMUMzFcbR9oHRnK 0cwfgIdFjTf+5Q79IahvMSroHRh9toYwEgsnAhukJOO7yyquFNHKdhWhq91JnUgs+a6J 9d3Nlr1ZiijQFgewXdST4hA9xxC+6gXlsT5myZySJh6iDSr34vKEndhhoc7AE7hsq5bR HcSJJbi2cIhBQ6bZwI9zMI16NLyFkT5QPcK3+PLPouWVRrfIglmBU4KwYwz2IgwC5zww a6SQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=8xgavnCgXauasD69OtwwlNfnaX4YL02PFWB4aJMGxQA=; b=KKMynvlwbImX8PDgCovJP22eBeP6e8pFxcDaApFDkcsbdSJeU9eBWCfQqIg9BSGfUd tRI6pJ5ytrlGoSS/YC9MXL93DyQFBy1VlHrYYQVW1io0xNoaXVuirspZbRBKsKQwQY5Q QrxVNLmOt3YslWsX368NG47HZDJONMUJdBoI18w8SpHchepV+8ky0lkjHwSt3MSlhvOr DX55OHzyTbi9gjvh9zqUvpW+CQaW/IuEMGpT4SGNf2jfyxtsh4PYy3VmNXE8UEyQPXTq VVarX77J1RGIjE9bMF7r8vzmz8kyzFvlNsMpGBY3Jb1fHUy3daelD0rDsuStqD1PBOAR KpsA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531m0xeaN7WGGg47ZJaCfTgfA7LsQmS9fYpgBAMGH6Z0QuTcyow6 mJi9ji6SWLEBkLBGXyO83LfVwCJIFfakXg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyzNJ4khrXJt9kw7Xiv2AA2P1f6A+BXDEulT22vLRk9+TJV1wgLt45Kl0O2fAJ+E+PxrVTpxA==
X-Received: by 2002:a50:ee10:: with SMTP id g16mr13936828eds.215.1615555143815; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 05:19:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:984:65b0:2:fcfe:64df:9b6e:3e7e? ([2001:984:65b0:2:fcfe:64df:9b6e:3e7e]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id sb4sm2727542ejb.71.2021.03.12.05.19.03 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 12 Mar 2021 05:19:03 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Some late comments on draft-ietf-quic-load-balancers
To: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>, IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
References: <CACsn0cn70MK699XyWmYp7i3nw7TSwPS4q94A4BFf4FFVy9MNrg@mail.gmail.com>
From: James <james.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2b044df9-0f4f-d3cf-bda8-b329088d2ab6@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2021 14:19:02 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.16; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CACsn0cn70MK699XyWmYp7i3nw7TSwPS4q94A4BFf4FFVy9MNrg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-AU
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/UqHS4lFfnQaluOW2okesk-p9k2c>
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, 12 Mar 2021 13:19:08 -0000
I've raised a small PR[1] which should cover this, however I think there is some other considerations that may belong in a separate PR: * What happens when a service receives a token with a timestamp which points to a time in the future? Should this just be accepted, or treated as an error? * Is there a way we can remove the requirement for having time_t as the timestamp value and instead use a linear incrementing value relative to the server and service that is independent of other timescales? - J 1: https://github.com/quicwg/load-balancers/pull/100 On 11-03-2021 22:48, Watson Ladd wrote: > Dear QUIC WG, > > First a moment of unforgivable pedantry. Universal time is > unfortunately not the right name for UTC, which is slightly different. > It could also mean UT1 or some other variations It's also not clear > what the future of computer timekeeping is and I know several places > don't synchronize to UTC internally. I think the best way to handle > this is to say something like "synchronized" and leave open as to > exactly how that is done. > > I agree with the comments that there are too many options and should > be fewer. Other then that I didn't see any problems but I'm probably > too sleepy right now to spot them. > > Sincerely, > Watson Ladd
- Some late comments on draft-ietf-quic-load-balanc… Watson Ladd
- Re: Some late comments on draft-ietf-quic-load-ba… James
- Re: Some late comments on draft-ietf-quic-load-ba… Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen
- Re: Some late comments on draft-ietf-quic-load-ba… Martin Duke