idnits 2.17.1 draft-schinazi-quic-h3-datagram-04.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The abstract seems to contain references ([1]), which it shouldn't. Please replace those with straight textual mentions of the documents in question. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (April 16, 2020) is 1464 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Experimental ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: '1' on line 226 -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: '2' on line 228 == Outdated reference: A later version (-10) exists of draft-ietf-quic-datagram-00 == Outdated reference: A later version (-34) exists of draft-ietf-quic-http-27 == Outdated reference: A later version (-34) exists of draft-ietf-quic-transport-27 Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 4 warnings (==), 3 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group D. Schinazi 3 Internet-Draft Google LLC 4 Intended status: Experimental April 16, 2020 5 Expires: October 18, 2020 7 Using QUIC Datagrams with HTTP/3 8 draft-schinazi-quic-h3-datagram-04 10 Abstract 12 The QUIC DATAGRAM extension provides application protocols running 13 over QUIC with a mechanism to send unreliable data while leveraging 14 the security and congestion-control properties of QUIC. However, 15 QUIC DATAGRAM frames do not provide a means to demultiplex 16 application contexts. This document defines how to use QUIC DATAGRAM 17 frames when the application protocol running over QUIC is HTTP/3 by 18 adding an identifier at the start of the frame payload. 20 Discussion of this work is encouraged to happen on the QUIC IETF 21 mailing list (quic@ietf.org [1]) or on the GitHub repository which 22 contains the draft: . 25 Status of This Memo 27 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 28 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 30 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 31 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 32 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 33 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 35 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 36 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 37 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 38 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 40 This Internet-Draft will expire on October 18, 2020. 42 Copyright Notice 44 Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 45 document authors. All rights reserved. 47 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 48 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 49 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 50 publication of this document. Please review these documents 51 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 52 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 53 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 54 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 55 described in the Simplified BSD License. 57 Table of Contents 59 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 60 1.1. Conventions and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 61 2. HTTP/3 DATAGRAM Frame Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 62 2.1. Flow Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 63 3. Flow Identifier Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 64 4. The H3_DATAGRAM HTTP/3 SETTINGS Parameter . . . . . . . . . . 4 65 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 66 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 67 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 68 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 69 7.2. URIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 70 Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 71 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 73 1. Introduction 75 The QUIC DATAGRAM extension [DGRAM] provides application protocols 76 running over QUIC [QUIC] with a mechanism to send unreliable data 77 while leveraging the security and congestion-control properties of 78 QUIC. However, QUIC DATAGRAM frames do not provide a means to 79 demultiplex application contexts. This document defines how to use 80 QUIC DATAGRAM frames when the application protocol running over QUIC 81 is HTTP/3 [H3] by adding an identifier at the start of the frame 82 payload. 84 This design mimics the use of Stream Types in HTTP/3, which provide a 85 demultiplexing identifier at the start of each unidirectional stream. 87 Discussion of this work is encouraged to happen on the QUIC IETF 88 mailing list (quic@ietf.org [2]) or on the GitHub repository which 89 contains the draft: . 92 1.1. Conventions and Definitions 94 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 95 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and 96 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 97 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all 98 capitals, as shown here. 100 2. HTTP/3 DATAGRAM Frame Format 102 When used with HTTP/3, the Datagram Data field of QUIC DATAGRAM 103 frames uses the following format: 105 0 1 2 3 106 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 107 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 108 | Flow Identifier (i) ... 109 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 110 | HTTP/3 Datagram Payload (*) ... 111 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 113 Figure 1: HTTP/3 DATAGRAM Frame Format 115 Flow Identifier: A variable-length integer indicating the Flow 116 Identifier of the datagram (see Section 2.1). 118 HTTP/3 Datagram Payload: The payload of the datagram, whose 119 semantics are defined by individual applications. 121 2.1. Flow Identifiers 123 Flow identifiers represent bidirectional flows of datagrams within a 124 single QUIC connection. These are conceptually similar to streams in 125 the sense that they allow multiplexing of application data. Of 126 course flows lack any of the ordering or reliability guarantees of 127 streams. 129 Beyond this, a sender SHOULD ensure that DATAGRAM frames within a 130 single flow are transmitted in order relative to one another. If 131 multiple DATAGRAM frames can be packed into a single QUIC packet, the 132 sender SHOULD group them by flow identifier to promote fate-sharing 133 within a specific flow and improve the ability to process batches of 134 datagram messages efficiently on the receiver. 136 3. Flow Identifier Allocation 138 Implementations of HTTP/3 that support the DATAGRAM extension MUST 139 provide a flow identifier allocation service. That service will 140 allow applications co-located with HTTP/3 to request a unique flow 141 identifier that they can subsequently use for their own purposes. 142 The HTTP/3 implementation will then parse the flow identifier of 143 incoming DATAGRAM frames and use it to deliver the frame to the 144 appropriate application. 146 Even flow identifiers are client-initiated, while odd flow 147 identifiers are server-initiated. This means that an HTTP/3 client 148 implementation of the flow identifier allocation service MUST only 149 provide even identifiers, while a server implementation MUST only 150 provide odd identifiers. Note that, once allocated, any flow 151 identifier can be used by both client and server - only allocation 152 carries separate namespaces to avoid requiring synchronization. 154 4. The H3_DATAGRAM HTTP/3 SETTINGS Parameter 156 Implementations of HTTP/3 that support this mechanism can indicate 157 that to their peer by sending the H3_DATAGRAM SETTINGS parameter with 158 a value of 1. The value of the H3_DATAGRAM SETTINGS parameter MUST 159 be either 0 or 1. A value of 0 indicates that this mechanism is not 160 supported. An endpoint that receives the H3_DATAGRAM SETTINGS 161 parameter with a value that is neither 0 or 1 MUST terminate the 162 connection with error H3_SETTINGS_ERROR. 164 And endpoint that sends the H3_DATAGRAM SETTINGS parameter with a 165 value of 1 MUST send the max_datagram_frame_size QUIC Transport 166 Parameter [DGRAM]. An endpoint that receives the H3_DATAGRAM 167 SETTINGS parameter with a value of 1 on a QUIC connection that did 168 not also receive the max_datagram_frame_size QUIC Transport Parameter 169 MUST terminate the connection with error H3_SETTINGS_ERROR. 171 When clients use 0-RTT, they MAY store the value of the server's 172 H3_DATAGRAM SETTINGS parameter. Doing so allows the client to use 173 HTTP/3 datagrams in 0-RTT packets. When servers decide to accept 174 0-RTT data, they MUST send a H3_DATAGRAM SETTINGS parameter greater 175 or equal to the value they sent to the client in the connection where 176 they sent them the NewSessionTicket message. If a client stores the 177 value of the H3_DATAGRAM SETTINGS parameter with their 0-RTT state, 178 they MUST validate that the new value of the H3_DATAGRAM SETTINGS 179 parameter sent by the server in the handshake is greater or equal to 180 the stored value; if not, the client MUST terminate the connection 181 with error H3_SETTINGS_ERROR. 183 5. Security Considerations 185 This document currently does not have additional security 186 considerations beyond those defined in [QUIC] and [DGRAM]. 188 6. IANA Considerations 190 This document will request IANA to register the following entry in 191 the "HTTP/3 Settings" registry: 193 +--------------+-------+---------------+---------+ 194 | Setting Name | Value | Specification | Default | 195 +==============+=======+===============+=========+ 196 | H3_DATAGRAM | 0x276 | This Document | 0 | 197 +--------------+-------+---------------+---------+ 199 7. References 201 7.1. Normative References 203 [DGRAM] Pauly, T., Kinnear, E., and D. Schinazi, "An Unreliable 204 Datagram Extension to QUIC", draft-ietf-quic-datagram-00 205 (work in progress), February 2020. 207 [H3] Bishop, M., "Hypertext Transfer Protocol Version 3 208 (HTTP/3)", draft-ietf-quic-http-27 (work in progress), 209 February 2020. 211 [QUIC] Iyengar, J. and M. Thomson, "QUIC: A UDP-Based Multiplexed 212 and Secure Transport", draft-ietf-quic-transport-27 (work 213 in progress), February 2020. 215 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 216 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 217 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 218 . 220 [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 221 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 222 May 2017, . 224 7.2. URIs 226 [1] mailto:quic@ietf.org 228 [2] mailto:quic@ietf.org 230 Acknowledgments 232 The DATAGRAM frame identifier was previously part of the DATAGRAM 233 frame definition itself, the author would like to acknowledge the 234 authors of that document and the members of the IETF QUIC working 235 group for their suggestions. Additionally, the author would like to 236 thank Martin Thomson for suggesting the use of an HTTP/3 SETTINGS 237 parameter. 239 Author's Address 241 David Schinazi 242 Google LLC 243 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway 244 Mountain View, California 94043 245 United States of America 247 Email: dschinazi.ietf@gmail.com