Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] Expand CID ratchet text (#1453)

From: Mike Bishop <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 17:46:52 +0000 (UTC)

Fixes #1276, plus removes a stray reference to CIDs being used in sequential order.  Encountered #1452 while writing this; if we come to a resolution quickly I can incorporate that here as well.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1453

-- Commit Summary --

  * Expand CID ratchet text

-- File Changes --

    M draft-ietf-quic-transport.md (13)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1453.patch
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1453.diff

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1453

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 11:05:00 -0700

martinthomson commented on this pull request.

> @@ -1857,13 +1857,20 @@ congestion state (see {{migration-cc}}), so the port SHOULD only be changed
 infrequently.
 
 An endpoint that receives a successfully authenticated packet with a previously
-unused connection ID MUST use the next available connection ID for any packets
-it sends to that address.  To avoid changing connection IDs multiple times when
+unused connection ID MUST use a new connection ID for any future packets it
+sends to that address.  To avoid changing connection IDs multiple times when

Isn't the point of this PR to cover the case you describe in the issue?  That is, you need to say "unless it is likely that the peer changed its connection ID in response to the endpoint changing."  Or something like that.  I don't know how to implement that other than to block switches when you change, unless there is a path change.  This is tricky.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1453#pullrequestreview-129267698

---

From: Mike Bishop <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 11:29:20 -0700

MikeBishop commented on this pull request.

 infrequently.

The point of the PR grew as I worked on it.  :-)  Initially, it was to replace "the next available" with "a new" now that sequence numbers are gone.  Then, while I was at it, I decided to pick up #1276 (what happens if you're out of CIDs?).  But then I ran into the fact that the existing text will lead you into that spiral.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1453#discussion_r195827758

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 15:22:31 -0700

Merged #1453.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1453#event-1689824166