IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] TCP Connection ID

cait <cait@asomi.com> Wed, 20 May 2020 17:32 UTC

Return-Path: <cait@asomi.com>
X-Original-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46EBE3A0B01 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 May 2020 10:32:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.33
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.33 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, INVALID_MSGID=0.568, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=0.001, MSGID_SHORT=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=netorgft3309700.onmicrosoft.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 P4WAQ5FismYN for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 May 2020 10:32:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAM10-BN7-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn7nam10hn2233.outbound.protection.outlook.com [52.100.155.233]) (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 728F93A0AFC for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 May 2020 10:32:05 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=jeu3oyRi+O7xbB20FypCWaWtXtnOcFwjvYpJPp5oZ6bdC3oo0GcsAuZtUJDm1tZTYNvmERiU01xzZehmwZSeT7XKMhM+UwMeTGENqcANkt0j/DKcJ9CS3n6AqKvqlTwpOXOlO54jSSFLfxl9enk1Xa8u9iQKfx4BlbKI0IqX1gPGbpAqLW9+TCXXS3giiyVT4sMji2CLKM28TZnRrOgbXeDOkOqxoPG+cytkssdQg8dyfjyxxyE0fBeIoBCMGKniA2J9TKHMzTzWCVd72++DziooYmee/w0WpAuxNhljUBM2G6myVzKg8Df9vckskcPV6Zgc7HfQWtyenSMJHXXfmg==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=3LPCd7fQOyQRm2imIy5qUO697xRg0eR6z6RbPiWt6H4=; b=cvvgCVpkjnjSR11/kCC0dFL/hAgaYsk9Nh7OEvAjg3kABO4Ow+x76ttzAa8lk9Sw5Kk/J2fNqHK8q0dl3M0XQnWMuG02psmDYiVJmaOFhc6Rq7Xhpfi+RifwsPC12jzrfDIBTyrgWtvvzaPidyrXAQpCPQSYu8UZXhKFiaYYXNxye5MJqTq8MarpDGzz0+dYYjS1vb3BIrwr7aW1/QXJW4wq0NyN4SdeDy/GXwPdZZie5Ks4RyaMg4PfSw7Oa6T5aZMHqusignscaIFNX+jKVAPlMboqnEuqau4E6fmRb8FaJUWZkyns+eqeW5YbNP18u9SYwPmoy0aA8YMfK1cunw==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=asomi.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=asomi.com; dkim=pass header.d=asomi.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=NETORGFT3309700.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-NETORGFT3309700-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=3LPCd7fQOyQRm2imIy5qUO697xRg0eR6z6RbPiWt6H4=; b=r1hMngdfzRW87qp58DgOkrhXWx0HkuXEw5tPe7/p8eYzdkWPTnCjx01IKFt7eYcfcevmzQLVd/kkYEIWlSv++aGiHIbl0nSb8WiTmeGqxFdASt+YebUV930uTYIVGKXRKqLyhswVIUB1BhE8tG6tF1js09zAfe7HnmZYalCwoDk=
Authentication-Results: gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;gmail.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=asomi.com;
Received: from SN6PR11MB3005.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:805:d3::17) by SN6PR11MB2671.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:805:60::18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3021.23; Wed, 20 May 2020 17:32:02 +0000
Received: from SN6PR11MB3005.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::6522:bb06:f6d:4ede]) by SN6PR11MB3005.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::6522:bb06:f6d:4ede%3]) with mapi id 15.20.3000.033; Wed, 20 May 2020 17:32:02 +0000
Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 12:32:00 -0500
From: cait <cait@asomi.com>
To: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>, Alexander Azimov <a.e.azimov@gmail.com>
Cc: tcpm <tcpm@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <CAEGSd=DUXKguZg5Up8+0qUJ66GaDro54KtOUkYnnWm2a=uLLSA@mail.gmail.com> <F9052E4F-16BB-4F22-8AAB-FED5CF7FD365@gmail.com>
References: <CAEGSd=DQwj_XbpxCz=7GYTgzjGM=ARqgw3oG58_Y9hbNZpPPrQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAEGSd=BrgqFrZVexkKhvYr2Yeu-B2Gyde7aYevPqTr8MzWQs4A@mail.gmail.com> <F9052E4F-16BB-4F22-8AAB-FED5CF7FD365@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="EdoMail5ec56990_5ed04a71_6850"
X-ClientProxiedBy: DM6PR01CA0018.prod.exchangelabs.com (2603:10b6:5:296::23) To SN6PR11MB3005.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:805:d3::17)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1
Received: from email.client.edison.tech (2600:8803:400:74f:bdfc:27e5:8481:4dd4) by DM6PR01CA0018.prod.exchangelabs.com (2603:10b6:5:296::23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3000.26 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 20 May 2020 17:32:01 +0000
X-Originating-IP: [2600:8803:400:74f:bdfc:27e5:8481:4dd4]
X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email
X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: e8d16003-4749-492e-5440-08d7fce3b523
X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: SN6PR11MB2671:
X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: <SN6PR11MB26714192BDCD5CC8872CCD63D3B60@SN6PR11MB2671.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
X-MS-Oob-TLC-OOBClassifiers: OLM:9508;
X-Forefront-PRVS: 04097B7F7F
X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1
X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;
X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: DCvGOncPhsEiLY0rws26w1CYO+L/zXw1HuvasOCKeuPRciOZZjmZRjy8JSvrNId/1FRXQccSh78OJaSQvjGJxGXDm+/rnraeiuOW8xVP2sXQoh2OvE2KrypS8KySOO2hcOuRkrET4kdsUvq8xTxwkICvSFQlXaxpoNdwBMM29bfXIxlHk1Pj1xVNERaxDBdf9KJvjoCu0k3XpfOruOOBnn7+xDgUBpHw+ShmS0QcdKExwoa9+2Z0JhUS0xvu0Cwa7EsK3RGpfI31ByFqeX/7kRUqVaQe6Gn9cEw1CBfmAjG/d5Mg8rDt+6DHvNgwrg7y56b/U9fV1raUEkgBU41RbUYOoU1NP9pUgcey8myFdJsjIxRscMQ/r0rDtSpwQ/J7veSTw9J1RujisGUEpngDuQ==
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:SN6PR11MB3005.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(7916004)(136003)(366004)(39830400003)(396003)(376002)(346002)(8936002)(316002)(110136005)(53546011)(61793004)(66556008)(66476007)(6506007)(8676002)(86362001)(2906002)(52116002)(33964004)(44144004)(186003)(16526019)(4326008)(33716001)(966005)(6486002)(5660300002)(66946007)(6512007)(9686003)(508600001)(15920700027); DIR:OUT; SFP:1501;
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData: 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
X-OriginatorOrg: asomi.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: e8d16003-4749-492e-5440-08d7fce3b523
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 May 2020 17:32:02.6319 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: a90e44c6-9570-49f9-9cdb-dff096fd98a3
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: HVcsanpArRB/2TX8tQFdqhtciIhu+hxwwLn5C4VrKULj1M3pfPA9aj9P2c0Q/o1k
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN6PR11MB2671
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/F2fi3yfKfOL37U1kg161t9sExGY>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] TCP Connection ID
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tcpm/>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 17:32:08 -0000

 
 
 
Read the caveats in the RFC that Joe cited. How would a server chosen direct index fair any better than client selected?
 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
>  
> On May 20, 2020 at 8:08 AM, Alexander Azimov  <a.e.azimov@gmail.com>  wrote:
>  
>    
> Hi all, 
>
>  
> The email from   Joe got into the spam box, so I was able to find it only after your notice. Thank you.
>  
>
>  
> The Host Id presented in RFC7974 is a very different approach: it is client-side id generated at the moment of the SYN which should help to distinguish different hosts behind NAT.
>  
>
>  
> What I'm looking for is a connection id, generated at the server-side and sent back with a SYN/ACK, which is next mirrored by the client.. It is not meant for host identification, but it can be used for connection identification   by the middlebox under the same administrative control. And there is no need to have a 1:1 map id to a server, instead, each server should use randomized ids with encryption.
>  
>
>  
> And speaking about IPv6 Flow Label it's not working for IPv4   + it current implementation in Linux already has great use cases, so even in the world of IPv6 only I would prefer to keep it without   overloading its functions.
>  
>  
>  
>  _______________________________________________ tcpm mailing list tcpm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email