IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Is CONNECTION_CLOSE frame Ack-eliciting？

Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net> Wed, 05 June 2019 20:40 UTC

Return-Path: <huitema@huitema.net>
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 BF024120159 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Jun 2019 13:40:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 gUU7Q2zOnaun for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Jun 2019 13:40:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx36-out10.antispamcloud.com (mx36-out10.antispamcloud.com [209.126.121.30]) (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 0477412014B for <quic@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Jun 2019 13:40:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [66.113.192.14] (helo=xsmtp06.mail2web.com) by mx66.antispamcloud.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <huitema@huitema.net>) id 1hYci7-00058L-1o for quic@ietf.org; Wed, 05 Jun 2019 22:40:40 +0200
Received: from [10.5.2.49] (helo=xmail11.myhosting.com) by xsmtp06.mail2web.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <huitema@huitema.net>) id 1hYci3-0001rh-Bh for quic@ietf.org; Wed, 05 Jun 2019 16:40:36 -0400
Received: (qmail 12168 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2019 20:40:34 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.1.103]) (Authenticated-user:_huitema@huitema.net@[172.56.42.223]) (envelope-sender <huitema@huitema.net>) by xmail11.myhosting.com (qmail-ldap-1.03) with ESMTPA for <jiuhai.zhang@gmail.com>; 5 Jun 2019 20:40:33 -0000
To: Ian Swett <ianswett=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Marten Seemann <martenseemann@gmail.com>
Cc: Nick Banks <nibanks@microsoft.com>, Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen <mikkelfj@gmail.com>, IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>, Jiuhai Zhang <jiuhai.zhang@gmail.com>
References: <CAG9+TpaByVDQZujwtRo9LHcqFn2cOxmy09y-JmVOAzMVroagVw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKcm_gO7A8gq7a234D8DF-yAre-7_rubJsn10bPXsS6eQPW5zg@mail.gmail.com> <BL0PR2101MB10437A1A42141B3481712B95B3160@BL0PR2101MB1043.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <CAN1APdfvQ9iewtPz0GBvyONaHfBNpyp28Q4rY97=o6ranmGD2g@mail.gmail.com> <CAKcm_gP=yjZXSJ39pv=zJw8T+Uvvf6CCocY9gWmO6NU90ACavw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN1APdeVD7ummf=fEvsjBDMOrGRxvbwmtnRi--rO8p39Jp0wtw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOYVs2ohkoMWqxYPO4JAm2oyBEYQjDuvgmqyNH5kWiRXS29Tgg@mail.gmail.com> <CAKcm_gOyD124KK3jnjxcboiq9dKG37WpOhdy_q-Ta_Nkg=1XiQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
Openpgp: preference=signencrypt
Autocrypt: addr=huitema@huitema.net; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQENBFIRX8gBCAC26usy/Ya38IqaLBSu33vKD6hP5Yw390XsWLaAZTeQR64OJEkoOdXpvcOS HWfMIlD5s5+oHfLe8jjmErFAXYJ8yytPj1fD2OdSKAe1TccUBiOXT8wdVxSr5d0alExVv/LO I/vA2aU1TwOkVHKSapD7j8/HZBrqIWRrXUSj2f5n9tY2nJzG9KRzSG0giaJWBfUFiGb4lvsy IaCaIU0YpfkDDk6PtK5YYzuCeF0B+O7N9LhDu/foUUc4MNq4K3EKDPb2FL1Hrv0XHpkXeMRZ olpH8SUFUJbmi+zYRuUgcXgMZRmZFL1tu6z9h6gY4/KPyF9aYot6zG28Qk/BFQRtj7V1ABEB AAG0J0NocmlzdGlhbiBIdWl0ZW1hIDxodWl0ZW1hQGh1aXRlbWEubmV0PokBOQQTAQIAIwUC UhFfyAIbLwcLCQgHAwIBBhUIAgkKCwQWAgMBAh4BAheAAAoJEJNDCbJVyA1yhbYH/1ud6x6m VqGIp0JcZUfSQO8w+TjugqxCyGNn+w/6Qb5O/xENxNQ4HaMQ5uSRK9n8WKKDDRSzwZ4syKKf wbkfj05vgFxrjCynVbm1zs2X2aGXh+PxPL/WHUaxzEP7KjYbLtCUZDRzOOrm+0LMktngT/k3 6+EZoLEM52hwwpIAzJoscyEz7QfqMOZtFm6xQnlvDQeIrHx0KUvwo/vgDLK3SuruG1CSHcR0 D24kEEUa044AIUKBS3b0b8AR7f6mP2NcnLpdsibtpabi9BzqAidcY/EjTaoea46HXALk/eJd 6OLkLE6UQe1PPzQC4jB7rErX2BxnSkHDw50xMgLRcl5/b1a5AQ0EUhFfyAEIAKp7Cp8lqKTV CC9QiAf6QTIjW+lie5J44Ad++0k8gRgANZVWubQuCQ71gxDWLtxYfFkEXjG4TXV/MUtnOliG 5rc2E+ih6Dg61Y5PQakm9OwPIsOx+2R+iSW325ngln2UQrVPgloO83QiUoi7mBJPbcHlxkhZ bd3+EjFxSLIQogt29sTcg2oSh4oljUpz5niTt69IOfZx21kf29NfDE+Iw56gfrxI2ywZbu5o G+d0ZSp0lsovygpk4jK04fDTq0vxjEU5HjPcsXC4CSZdq5E2DrF4nOh1UHkHzeaXdYR2Bn1Y wTePfaHBFlvQzI+Li/Q6AD/uxbTM0vIcsUxrv3MNHCUAEQEAAYkCPgQYAQIACQUCUhFfyAIb LgEpCRCTQwmyVcgNcsBdIAQZAQIABgUCUhFfyAAKCRC22tOSFDh1UOlBB/94RsCJepNvmi/c YiNmMnm0mKb6vjv43OsHkqrrCqJSfo95KHyl5Up4JEp8tiJMyYT2mp4IsirZHxz/5lqkw9Az tcGAF3GlFsj++xTyD07DXlNeddwTKlqPRi/b8sppjtWur6Pm+wnAHp0mQ7GidhxHccFCl65w uT7S/ocb1MjrTgnAMiz+x87d48n1UJ7yIdI41Wpg2XFZiA9xPBiDuuoPwFj14/nK0elV5Dvq 4/HVgfurb4+fd74PV/CC/dmd7hg0ZRlgnB5rFUcFO7ywb7/TvICIIaLWcI42OJDSZjZ/MAzz BeXm263lHh+kFxkh2LxEHnQGHCHGpTYyi4Z3dv03HtkH/1SI8joQMQq00Bv+RdEbJXfEExrT u4gtdZAihwvy97OPA2nCdTAHm/phkzryMeOaOztI4PS8u2Ce5lUB6P/HcGtK/038KdX5MYST Fn8KUDt4o29bkv0CUXwDzS3oTzPNtGdryBkRMc9b+yn9+AdwFEH4auhiTQXPMnl0+G3nhKr7 jvzVFJCRif3OAhEm4vmBNDE3uuaXFQnbK56GJrnqVN+KX5Z3M7X3fA8UcVCGOEHXRP/aubiw Ngawj0V9x+43kUapFp+nF69R53UI65YtJ95ec4PTO/Edvap8h1UbdEOc4+TiYwY1TBuIKltY 1cnrjgAWUh/Ucvr++/KbD9tD6C8=
Message-ID: <3432c428-9c16-93cf-4455-b030c9527beb@huitema.net>
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2019 13:40:30 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAKcm_gOyD124KK3jnjxcboiq9dKG37WpOhdy_q-Ta_Nkg=1XiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Language: en-US
Subject: Re: Is CONNECTION_CLOSE frame Ack-eliciting？
X-Originating-IP: 66.113.192.14
X-Spampanel-Domain: xsmtpout.mail2web.com
X-Spampanel-Username: 66.113.192.14
Authentication-Results: antispamcloud.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=66.113.192.14@xsmtpout.mail2web.com
X-Spampanel-Outgoing-Class: unsure
X-Spampanel-Outgoing-Evidence: Combined (0.15)
X-Recommended-Action: accept
X-Filter-ID: Mvzo4OR0dZXEDF/gcnlw0WF37iHSchYgKnNGmAxHYR+pSDasLI4SayDByyq9LIhVUZbR67CQ7/vm /hHDJU4RXkTNWdUk1Ol2OGx3IfrIJKywOmJyM1qr8uRnWBrbSAGDcnqpk5VeF3xR4kF6iVwRtbgN zB/4Jkrw1eDLcif59ftrR6Fyzsm2NAZtbXmwzXzM/sevPPdLVvjz7b14RFNIS75QzTLy/EjEcXZ5 IgaMYzlfZdf1siwYNJirk4ABKayR03+K7Ju/qxRhvHDAT5LyR61Qv/sjUDXLdm6w1gNv1euKTrwh UfUHUrPvTkTGu7YwVDQ0hbqcLWUbjgHMZS6COdI/uLAeALf3vLWnw0F/4+fmuTv/CYIzmchrGsA6 CN6O7qbWTdT56xh4Rya20+oBtwahqtg42IMQXC/e/thfmehs05Web8nJyEMtLxwhnYinDFrKlNc7 qNKmpnIY9d8cOJUa+B0z/Xg2ESGxDSOWWoTyIUtK8Miz//+1AD61I8sOcFFSGcngeU5u06zO01Ld 6NjlDHh8k6TTdHl8m1/8O//LcKgaYLn9Y2q9E0HrGD+jjSFzFGPNqtT/ZMOz6wxUehT6+eMIjyeL k8Nf0SfiCa+x5xMEOToeUkKHbFkPY7RXd9NKxBWsVxMktDIV0UvDQayp/agYZfrnDk8+IFUpab7m 9Ql4Ld7qe/xoNQPgy7UpxcIWHOi9y3yF+Ot2t6dhJc2bXYMFScrLivfWmWkJo22CHZOREywSBAd6 WuRFS3mxs3T2CPnVGlRvOomQUSscWtvymYfZ8O/Se8jQNEyEo8M8CVsONrMJuGzuoGnKTKcymM5H 5NK8ObCxL+Ab3gHeBGp1PWox/HcVwRsYfOuMC9EDvRTWmuYW5XPvbs91Tlwp9H4DectLaqn7kLkt Zo9lqwZlJF8UKGQcpLF8m4y5fNSIlEy3YgJZkOfaaqfw0pD+E4vXmYOrZ6ynPfzK8qbeqosYcSFD ZkSOre2YUe/WyPr4xM5tUrEfL92iWzfzWX2vJeNfaj+DKN82dVVpaMxSGA==
X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@quarantine9.antispamcloud.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/dNmH9FSckf00GjS0b6WjeO4X7rE>
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, 05 Jun 2019 20:40:44 -0000

On 6/5/2019 9:38 AM, Ian Swett wrote:

> In the past, having an ACK bundled with CONNECTION_CLOSE has been
> useful to debug what the peer did and did not receive as of the end of
> the connection.
>
> Agreed on sending CONNECTION_CLOSE in response to CONNECTION_CLOSE
> being mostly useless.  I believe some wanted to allow it because if
> they received a CONNECTION_CLOSE in response to their
> CONNECTION_CLOSE, they could remove all state for the connection,
> including the saved CONNECTION_CLOSE packet?

Most of the arguments I heard one way or the other are based on power
management. Sending one more message requires waking up the radio, etc.,
which consumes significant power on a mobile device. Replying with a
connection close allows the peer to immediately exit the waiting state,
which might save some power -- but probably not as much as what is saved
on the client with not sending an extra message. If the client does send
a connection close, the server has to keep the state for 3*RTO, which is
not a very big deal.

-- Christian Huitema

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email