IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc1981bis-04

Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com> Tue, 14 February 2017 18:53 UTC

Return-Path: <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFA261296DF for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 10:53:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 4zu6XmOl2zU2 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 10:53:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm0-x242.google.com (mail-wm0-x242.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::242]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E436C129531 for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 10:53:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm0-x242.google.com with SMTP id u63so4945602wmu.2 for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 10:53:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZUdXZ/YRKADWNSGMCPd1LKqxvAuhXlF4fJnE5UU9N2c=; b=B7QLII2YXKUEOX2Vi7/FWpWcjRyi953ejSt0OFnGnIU6gxkBX4hh7bPz5BRH/GaMtE /rmjEcDNyC7hKJMiPNgQ09fOtqzsgKCjqOkEw0EIOsJbsZ45NIiffukv6p0on3AejfiR Q5p793Kjqb2tWsROzaQ7yiLMY9OPZxTZA8AReF35yuo84YEchWz9Ya/hvoac42zhnifA 0aRWOXZbcpvEzLcvG+WG/VQUFdcAQHWQKkizlQJjIKb2LlQVAJoDTMaCg0mYI27shwam 1RUui0Y5YFo+5439h8WHJUdJm1H7p4cgsuWdpH/MlUp137ShbGAEsg+ZjVZrgwoNd/wz bCag==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZUdXZ/YRKADWNSGMCPd1LKqxvAuhXlF4fJnE5UU9N2c=; b=WzVvYB3wuPhfEB7CPF2QAFSIqgSJ1r4Me1zUWmPUUUOJ/StvCXGE54RO0nT2VB7ejJ u+3MYepfsDS37AOA3WjFmmTNZgNMIam2m7kpBX0abtQItWHTEKb0EhVa4aK5kGxLwhka xXxSuQnTOmJ9S0qw36fONjkP8eNbTQkY/8hTAZhvo0ErE7AlJ65QmMZI7mHU1Iz9MRwq XIYEJHpyOUWWSvw+UElD5/Pd2ngvcg3lc2KFp1seBjO/PSFSGlLuOTG8j/Txne9w5Ux1 KsWzz06ZSDSptIhCeXEuEdRpZ6adYOPJPszVA43ax9aA9HyhZp6lKARlnMM1cTSf1Pnc hrLQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mButKaQFf45ttAFbp8xoMlMDn7bLP7m6Qlf7tJVjrLf+p3TFb8kMDWKEpAhr8bcw==
X-Received: by 10.28.232.90 with SMTP id f87mr4498610wmh.35.1487098429229; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 10:53:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.2.126] (host213-123-124-182.in-addr.btopenworld.com. [213.123.124.182]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l37sm1846390wrc.41.2017.02.14.10.53.48 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 14 Feb 2017 10:53:48 -0800 (PST)
To: otroan@employees.org
References: <148665359396.20513.9749548375095869760.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2997d33f-3884-7831-50ed-1713c93b3867@gmail.com> <b9dfd941-0eba-c257-fef4-2f5e6bbd82a8@gmail.com> <078b28a9a26540da9e4caaba4c436cd3@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com> <440c60d3-0687-c7f1-f8b6-19620e6f618a@gmail.com> <6cb665e0a2244dae93e1b5b91bd9495a@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com> <fce8c0ef-25b7-9ba7-a5bf-9b5d7f2b19fc@gmail.com> <f4f81574e09e45169438d39afeb83369@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com> <1fb9a3ad-19e5-0b35-d15a-e74fed88bb8b@gmail.com> <57307617-C87C-4430-B92A-59E28C6779CD@employees.org>
From: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <79dc448c-ac7e-faa2-7fe1-b189262f1d34@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 18:53:47 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <57307617-C87C-4430-B92A-59E28C6779CD@employees.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/0JyYwby3Thf_un0JKlCSNIRNi7A>
Cc: "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc1981bis-04
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 18:53:53 -0000

Ole

Maybe we could sort this out faster with a short phone call.

As I read the spec it says hunt for a new upper  limit every 10 mins, 
won't there be packet as it sends out oversized packets looking for a 
higher MTU?

Stewart


On 14/02/2017 18:33, otroan@employees.org wrote:
> Stewart,
>
>> *If*  you care about packet loss, then your only option is to probe the path with with
>> synthetic data that exactly mimics the live data, or not to probe at all and live
>> with the 1280. As I said 1280 is pretty close to 1496 which is all most networks
>> will give you in practice.
> Yes, but sending at 1280 does not work for IP tunnels. The whole purpose of the minimum MTU was to give space for tunnel headers (1500-1280).
>
>> When I think about the people asking for fast re-route to minimise packet loss, it seems
>> very strange to deliberately induce loss to try to stretch the MTU by 15%.
> Please show the data that there is significant loss. The measurements I have found has not shown that.
> If not, then let's please leave that argument on the shelf.
>
> (And please don't read me wrong, I think we should get DNS fixed, that we should fix the IP tunnelling protocols, and that we should get IP fragmentation deprecated).
>
> But right here, right now. PMTUD is for many problems the only solution on the table.
> We as a community can choose not to elevate the standard of course, and that will of course not have any big consequence.
> Are you afraid that elevating 1981, will hinder people from working on new and better solutions?
>
> Best regards,
> Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email