Re: [BEHAVE] PMTU Discovery and ICMPv6 filtering

Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca> Thu, 04 February 2010 16:37 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: behave@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: behave@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B97B3A689B; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 08:37:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.954
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.954 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f2r4vOk8xgC8; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 08:37:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [67.23.6.41]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 598403A6B0F; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 08:37:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sandelman.ottawa.on.ca (unknown [207.236.207.2]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA65634352; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 11:31:52 -0500 (EST)
Received: from marajade.sandelman.ca (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ottawa.on.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 906F64E798; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 11:09:59 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca>
To: Ed Jankiewicz <edward.jankiewicz@sri.com>
In-Reply-To: <4B69B06D.7080606@sri.com>
References: <4B69B06D.7080606@sri.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.1; nmh 1.1; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 21)
Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 11:09:59 -0500
Message-ID: <29721.1265299799@marajade.sandelman.ca>
Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca
Cc: softwires@ietf.org, Behave WG <behave@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] PMTU Discovery and ICMPv6 filtering
X-BeenThere: behave@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: mailing list of BEHAVE IETF WG <behave.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/behave>
List-Post: <mailto:behave@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 16:37:34 -0000

{resend with my subscribed email}

Ed, there are a number of things to say.
First, behaviour 4 is mostly described by RFC4301, I believe.
Yes, section 8.2.1.
If you find it is not available, then you need to talk to your vendors.

Behaviour 3 (which, in IPv4 speak, is essentially not copying the DF
bit), is often necessary, but it can mess up the plpmtu mechanism.

Second, PLPMTUD was publiched by the pmtud WG as RFC4821.
This is the best suggestion.

I wrote about what Freeswan/Openswan KLIPS tried to do, which was a
variation of #3, because we wanted the network to work...   it is at:
    http://www.sandelman.ca/SSW/ietf/ipsec/fragment/draft-richardson-ipsec-fragment.txt

Most of these ideas were incorporated into RFC4821.

-- 
]       He who is tired of Weird Al is tired of life!           |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON    |net architect[
] mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[
   Kyoto Plus: watch the video <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzx1ycLXQSE>
	               then sign the petition.