IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

otroan@employees.org Tue, 14 February 2017 19:14 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
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 33319129699 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 11:14:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=employees.org; domainkeys=pass (1024-bit key) header.from=otroan@employees.org header.d=employees.org
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 NEIWxuD0tWtk for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 11:14:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from esa01.kjsl.com (esa01.kjsl.com [IPv6:2607:7c80:54:3::87]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7CC2120724 for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 11:14:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cowbell.employees.org ([198.137.202.74]) by esa01.kjsl.com with ESMTP; 14 Feb 2017 19:14:51 +0000
Received: from cowbell.employees.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cowbell.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C82ED788A; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 11:14:51 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=employees.org; h=from :message-id:content-type:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to :cc:to:references; s=selector1; bh=apVArGmi0QTbAG9n9CO7lQ47yf0=; b= V6/s0GN+k5BfY/IgHZpJpejPgRQHkOgzWu9c/uCk5WPywILhNKkC+pEp/YU6EE/f ZI1dKp/RYmiLzL0k07mEtN15f0IYuaB/q4mpCjtQKRy0+PxToT9GUvZ8ytjBcWr9 Thu6mbl5sTdCs2D8DXmF13yqCau2hO81QR9ynCb2w4g=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=employees.org; h=from :message-id:content-type:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to :cc:to:references; q=dns; s=selector1; b=jLTcU4l77MYpNKeqm/U/V5/ btcDlodZvo2qLiA+SqIdR0QOi2ucClQCtIxm3MaNlvb1VZhNweuH0DynUoPdVKMy WxY898TANOVxFiSXZnYbExh0zkHVm+tCM3HR8O2hW0EPAjmTkziOURZHZt9jEkIC Oapil16Ov5uugG+It2iA=
Received: from h.hanazo.no (96.51-175-103.customer.lyse.net [51.175.103.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: otroan) by cowbell.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 27082D788E; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 11:14:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by h.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D4D08AE3919; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 20:14:57 +0100 (CET)
From: otroan@employees.org
Message-Id: <68CF4CA5-76E9-4610-8D58-A18A1DA00175@employees.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B2EEB6AE-88BF-47C4-B9EE-7AB2AD827A95"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 20:14:56 +0100
In-Reply-To: <79dc448c-ac7e-faa2-7fe1-b189262f1d34@gmail.com>
To: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
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> <79dc448c-ac7e-faa2-7fe1-b189262f1d34@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/TbWRJ7Jy2T5fO4ZlL1Qmu71QErU>
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 19:14:53 -0000

Stewart,


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

Yes, we can certainly do that!

> 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?

Yes.

Best regards,
Ole

> 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