Return-Path: 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 D608E3A0C57 for ; Sun, 5 Jul 2020 17:25:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=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=lowentropy.net header.b=B0KfzEzw; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=AnpsTn2l 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 KAY3T6diPdXw for ; Sun, 5 Jul 2020 17:25:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B829D3A0C52 for ; Sun, 5 Jul 2020 17:25:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13F8842D for ; Sun, 5 Jul 2020 20:25:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 05 Jul 2020 20:25:54 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type; s=fm2; bh=lGGvVkEXdVy6qmCQJaopk/ZbQ3T4CKu kAuzYxyFI9Rc=; b=B0KfzEzwvDFjtxgkAgBSP0ROFAZ1UckwVYHUeZmjv+zGBGB BeIxoV49+Zn5zcAkUQxcT74jSxB7yOV+8VjZEOktOjhJKx0e0lGSriaEbdpL/VtE DgpqCONNERqaBLBo7aIgeDsEKllWdaCyVDrnzZ1XlC5jTSl+vXLRzh3kTjkO86SC qQ32YiBAHZqIByMiBNzJzY9zG9OrVdiB+QKozEU6P3ansBd+dvzUy5QSeAcJ7mQf Q93CHlhtWCfiuumx+JKG4Fueuljcu+QR+vysrxYEiFjRVWyBLHC/HONJMyr/uiVl Fhd3h1jhbv0gp/VOTJ5W2FJsaCo6yftREwC86dw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=lGGvVk EXdVy6qmCQJaopk/ZbQ3T4CKukAuzYxyFI9Rc=; b=AnpsTn2l9pf5fKJRTRHOR3 YZUcNVfdoewtd0n5oaJjqKr5LmCx+lglS0dkfG6bK2DQGsZsTH5740M91nj1xnKQ gUp6wArkl7AV6EOKE8Z/gM98R5beiUZmaPjX8wQnE9bEg8bw0iDLlPCpi4GGiJix aW3IDrL1OWU+XK2Heanu9EIQYgypPpPC/R3t10QPPABL2PEkaGSSacRI70edi1X9 UPAoq/wINDMJzlPbKwg7pDZfvLoyqHD4IFi77NLvxygha/EwiF0dPjjOOiQvMtWD jC7VR4JGxhjjML3TPgaTOIqtMoolQdzGXjgLaVtmr11blnP16a1AQ0j9YF9WXTCw == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedruddvgdefudcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtre dtreertdenucfhrhhomhepfdforghrthhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohif vghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepkeetueeikedtkeelfeekve fhkeffvedvvefgkefgleeugfdvjeejgeffieegtdejnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgep tdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id DBE92E00AA; Sun, 5 Jul 2020 20:25:51 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.3.0-dev0-576-gfe2cd66-fm-20200629.001-gfe2cd668 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20200705202652.GB3335@lubuntu> References: <5943e1bd-fba9-473b-a20f-7992ad0579ab@www.fastmail.com> <65c908df-7123-46ee-838c-575f8154c811@www.fastmail.com> <9db597a6-5e75-4df6-5447-8204d052100c@huitema.net> <20200705202652.GB3335@lubuntu> Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2020 10:25:32 +1000 From: "Martin Thomson" To: quic@ietf.org Subject: Re: Greasing the QUIC Bit Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org 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: Mon, 06 Jul 2020 00:25:56 -0000 On Mon, Jul 6, 2020, at 06:26, Dmitri Tikhonov wrote: > When I read it the first time around, I interpreted it as "per packet." > If one interprets it as "per connection," it makes for the most efficient > method, which would be my preference. I had intended per packet, but I see how how you might interpret that differently. I think that you achieve the desired outcome if you make it "per connection ID". Using per connection adds a bit of entropy that can be used to link activity across paths. Whatever scope you choose it needs to be based on something everyone knows. Changing daily across all connections would also likely work (and would produce some interesting stats).