Questions about QUIC server reset issues

fish fish <siyufishing@gmail.com> Wed, 22 November 2017 07:26 UTC

Return-Path: <siyufishing@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 BA5C9127A91 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 23:26:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 a571ksyOIY6P for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 23:26:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg0-x22d.google.com (mail-pg0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::22d]) (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 C1D4612751F for <quic@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 23:26:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id s11so12156863pgc.5 for <quic@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 23:26:57 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:mime-version:subject:message-id:date:to; bh=eiLaWyRZajAGBIzeas9pFSLi/Z7+IjU1MUPIRp7AM2M=; b=gZvsgJ2TVYYFjhWZmYlFZz854laVRY6i+x4PXeV/SHVppm8tkwp6GV5wwDAAHNzGUe vmm/Ptyxvn1WnFWjUIxw70Wi6xOvqVUEUNNOzjRURK5BX0TWiDhFAs4GyZMRAznbTkJj /r3vCkIqNsAYGlATp91L7T6nzUTNfzpC50PTLSrmhjbiINl8hr12uD4Jd8yg+N+u8Tq6 3wcMSa2PSW3ypp7VKy69Dwv1K0zyPVbqZINz+AY104u/EO+jqJM+qageiss7xrDG9Nt3 5T3/otvbiNPVBQR1nFRIXHlQlQG1P+yDAGj9zRGX/8lGfH4sk3RGXX1UtRLhG2jHszvS dopg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:subject:message-id:date:to; bh=eiLaWyRZajAGBIzeas9pFSLi/Z7+IjU1MUPIRp7AM2M=; b=Lus2wJ4C6//cGp+o/YW5VmHf5ZUKpNi8bfhxpT6b8mNrDXJG95xVe0cgwrHNL3EYqZ GAyaFjaw1GPx/PEJGHMiXTays7qCzC0LaktWxsKH6hBeQOzGGKt+doUMUttCN9B/HNcn HbeEuzPVoxMg2+0to//fkx/+1XN2C7BfsYLvdJ/nDVd1iYm0Ehkby2fdNFW3CyDJkrR5 nt2Yj9KOMfDutzArgcXhBmr9ULEe2SYTN5s12Zy8XIBxZnLP6x+4G8teYnJXZf3uHmpN GD0Ub0BzO525+gAsMyr9cVGM6xOv/wyX4oZJecTgQyzVVMDR8poRBKBGf5s2TfwD7rf2 BpzQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX4tN4Sm0UYRDxbuuwFBP4nyQebJkzse6at1vSebY3Kt/5pGOyOW 8vvsoHElqehpjRIhsIv/9M0v8AWr
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMaxbSIzfd2oclZkdlojVVJuoTTeD30NmCgyO5t5EFMdqA7NPiyFO2csWt9xT6dJQWx2C7WbLg==
X-Received: by 10.99.121.140 with SMTP id u134mr19263057pgc.16.1511335617103; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 23:26:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2402:f000:2:3001:919a:303a:9cc0:433b? ([2402:f000:2:3001:919a:303a:9cc0:433b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m25sm30738637pfg.49.2017.11.21.23.26.55 for <quic@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 21 Nov 2017 23:26:56 -0800 (PST)
From: fish fish <siyufishing@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_4C1F72B1-A966-4A18-B844-E2960A65338D"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.1 \(3445.4.7\))
Subject: Questions about QUIC server reset issues
Message-Id: <B1FB662A-82F0-4E9B-B165-ADF0971D1E06@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 15:26:52 +0800
To: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.4.7)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/hZWrKHckV47IEVipYio-wP0XO3A>
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: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 07:27:00 -0000

Respected, 
	I am Siyu Yang from Tsinghua University in Beijing, China. I am a master candidate student interested in the transportation layer of satellite networks ( LEO/MEO/GEO ) using QUIC.
	Previously I have done an experiment building QUIC server and clients in a simulated satellite network environment. It turns out that QUIC/UDP performs much better than TCP/IP structure because of the reduced handshake RTTs and congestion control strategies.

	After reading Google’s paper on QUIC in sigcomm 2017, would you please tell me more about updates of quic’s server stateless reset strategies? Any solution if possible to solve?

	And I am also interested in QUIC cooperation with CDN in such a working case: mobile clients may apply for another CDN server when they are browsing using QUIC, if it is possible that a connection between CDN server A and the next CDN server B,  the server A would send the related users’ authentication info in service   (users’ public key and A’s public key so that B would not reject the clients’ requests though it is probably the first time that these clients seek for connection to B so that one-RTT saved in this “new” connection) to the server B if A knows that B would take over A to serve the clients ?

I might not be a very common phenomenon in terrestrial networks … I could think out one that:  a CDN incremental deployment that the newly established CDN server might “inherit” users’ authentication from its neighbor servers. 

But it could be a common phenomenon happening every few hours/days in satellite networks if we deploy a set of CDN servers for example in a MEO satellite networks which could cover the whole world with a couple of satellites. Some MEO-constellations has a good properties that the relative locations within these satellites does not change, just like constellations we observe in sky. In this time, the CDN servers serve one client in order and the next server coming to serve could be calculated easily. If QUIC could SUPPORT servers' authentication transport, it would help a lot in enhancement of the network flow in satellite networks!

And I am also interested that will authentication transport work in QUIC using TLS 1.3.

Maybe it would also help a lot in terrestrial networks if mobile users feel good to use their geolocation information …

Thanks in advance and looking forward to your reply.