[DNSOP] default value of draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation

fujiwara@jprs.co.jp Mon, 15 March 2021 04:16 UTC

Return-Path: <fujiwara@jprs.co.jp>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF4443A12CA for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Mar 2021 21:16:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 JEFkEIGlXxJP for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Mar 2021 21:16:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from off-send41.osa.jprs.co.jp (off-send41.osa.jprs.co.jp [117.104.133.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D76F53A12C9 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sun, 14 Mar 2021 21:16:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from off-sendsmg31.osa.jprs.co.jp (off-sendsmg31.osa.jprs.co.jp [172.23.8.161]) by off-send41.osa.jprs.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B3F6402F5D for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 13:16:05 +0900 (JST)
Received: from off-sendsmg31.osa.jprs.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss91 (Postfix) with ESMTP id E55C860259E4 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 13:16:04 +0900 (JST)
Received: from localhost (off-cpu08.osa.jprs.co.jp [172.23.4.18]) by off-sendsmg31.osa.jprs.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA2286025754 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 13:16:04 +0900 (JST)
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 13:16:04 +0900
Message-Id: <20210315.131604.152003594194628775.fujiwara@jprs.co.jp>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
From: fujiwara@jprs.co.jp
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.8 on Emacs 24.5
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-9.1.0.1231-8.6.0.1013-26030.004
X-TM-AS-Result: No--5.528-5.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--5.528-5.0-31-10
X-TMASE-Version: IMSS-9.1.0.1231-8.6.1013-26030.004
X-TMASE-Result: 10--5.528100-10.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: MRCSkNDUwMVCXIGdsOwlUh5+URxv1WlB/czC/snTsNe3CLdtdG1oCCLy wWZ/CAIYzkovv0N3yYDX+tgrcL6ts7CWtPU/7bfHnJ5tL+LbGOOOVGny5q72hlzJs4pAASZIhfw wa6XqPjki/kMQ5fJldEK3WEb5CMhweoVm+vcZsTf7gWP0TNHLHLgZIOJjEsJdLX3qyf3ewG+sQZ L8qlcJbQM+dAUYm4tbQR8mwg8x4Lg/QMF1B4qVfZN65fjGjYMQ+ZfOn+32vrBYbPLopoBzQquvF AAi8j/4HgEHvtBpvKWgzmadPkbg4QpA0iwOaGTlec1y1wrvN8X95dwSoVJjf5jXSdIxbOOKSDqf bARfcd56wVEyh4BxNZGTpe1iiCJqtD9qpBlNF8rP/MyuVlT/C0tIkhusciGXPllU9ZtDDM8gBwK KRHe+rwenwP8nUCrymLvlzzGK1uBQawl8gcuqRqIoVal+SOZ8JEb5Pk8u6Xs=
X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-12:0,22:0,33:0,34:0-0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/bUZeDhA5pfISUOP-6co1-wWxFDE>
Subject: [DNSOP] default value of draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 04:16:14 -0000

Dear DNSOP participants,

Thanks very much for good comments for draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation.

These are my proposal of Section 3.3.  Default Maximum DNS/UDP payload size.

I'm not sure what to do with "MAY, "SHOULD", or "MUST",
so please give us your opinion.

If it is acceptable, I will submit -05.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.3.  Default Maximum DNS/UDP payload size

   Default maximum DNS/UDP payload size depends on the connectivity of
   each node, it cannot be determined unconditinally.  However, there
   are good proposed values.

   Operators MAY select a good number from Table 1.

             +========================+==========+==========+
             |                 Source |     IPv4 | IPv6     |
             +========================+==========+==========+
             |      minimal: RFC 4035 |     1220 | 1220     |
             +------------------------+----------+----------+
             | Software developpers / |     1232 | 1232     |
             | DNSFlagDay2020 propose |          |          |
             +------------------------+----------+----------+
             | This document proposes |     1400 | 1400     |
             +------------------------+----------+----------+
             |  maximum: ethernet MTU |     1472 | 1452     |
             |                   1500 |          |          |
             +------------------------+----------+----------+
             |              calculate | MTU-20-8 | MTU-40-8 |
             +------------------------+----------+----------+

              Table 1: Default maximum DNS/UDP payload size

   However, operators of DNS servers SHOULD measure their path MTU to
   well-known locations on the Internet, such as [a-m].root-servers.net
   or [a-m].gtld-servers.net at setting up the servers.  The smallest
   value of path MTU is the server's path MTU to the Internet.  The
   server's maximum DNS/UDP payload size SHOULD be smaller than or equal
   to the reported path MTU minus IPv4/IPv6 header size (20/40) minus
   UDP header size (8).

   Details of default maximum DNS/UDP payload size is Appendix C.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

--
Kazunori Fujiwara, JPRS <fujiwara@jprs.co.jp>