Re: [homenet] udp-lite support?
Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> Tue, 30 December 2014 19:44 UTC
Return-Path: <dave.taht@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D94081A1B44 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Dec 2014 11:44:01 -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, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 piJxOQ-RBwEX for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Dec 2014 11:44:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi0-x22a.google.com (mail-oi0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8B1E1A1B37 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Dec 2014 11:43:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oi0-f42.google.com with SMTP id v63so33476540oia.1 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Dec 2014 11:43:59 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=eaw0BEshX+AoTMTo3f0WTPGgcZzjDDxV54UvVpET9zE=; b=FAp9+21vqDXOsejTx8RNQhREgsLrFmbrRoJaq0qadpTaQn+DmyM6O0FCiFbGzuOCKS 1Edo+LzX7vMf0C/B6spT6c/8hooryagNQSBQ+gnov/WRiV5sJQaZE/sW3CnumGG+8rxy 1bBCoj7mtjxCt2Y1w10DnzTNwFZCNo2ytEIGzs2Y75BWMOhY8unuEnxxHBTD0SmPxcb8 tDxueCS9WIrOvsnylS4c+RB4DobpwL2R688Ns6SJf74dDpcvChNkmtG/Jub4JAW5HQ8C TSCri6NVDhP++5dsUbiBxd/AXdB5r9DPA8+ozIyUfctv5GL7jwbwO2fw29DSzy+WMIlr rSaQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.22.198 with SMTP id g6mr4985264obf.16.1419968639210; Tue, 30 Dec 2014 11:43:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.202.169.209 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Dec 2014 11:43:59 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAESTAVvqhdbujnh-uQVB7oQ4fnx70aD17Q9zaFy4b39t_oq7hA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA93jw5+e0u=aHCjaBjwKrqdvhfwx5MbvG2yuKvBnOtHk_5jQg@mail.gmail.com> <CAESTAVvqhdbujnh-uQVB7oQ4fnx70aD17Q9zaFy4b39t_oq7hA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 11:43:59 -0800
Message-ID: <CAA93jw4unwJR2XCyNRDhS2yWJwFGL6XKqdh4dc3HaZ2AQFn42w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
To: Mark Townsley <mark@townsley.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/Jr7vR3e4osE1G1WYP1-2oqM7NsI
Cc: HOMENET <homenet@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [homenet] udp-lite support?
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/homenet/>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 19:44:02 -0000
On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 8:20 AM, Mark Townsley <mark@townsley.net> wrote: > > > On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I am growing concerned by the widespread adoption of udp as a baseline >> transport for so many protocols (webrtc, bittorrent maelstrom, etc.) >> Certainly a couple traceroutes alone could blow up my udp nat table on >> a busy router with open udp ports as can something as simple as trying >> to do reverse lookups on everything in a /64 - I long ago had to start >> closing udp ports on the firewall in under 30 seconds - (dns over ipv6 >> fixes this thoroughly, thank ghu), but having thoroughly blown up my >> world just now with mosh-multipath... >> >> I see udplite support is mandated by some homenet rfc or another. > > > Hi Dave, > > I could have missed it, but I don't recall UDP-Lite coming up before... > Which Homenet document are you referring to? Sorry, the rfcs I was mentally referring to were not homenet: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6092 and: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6936#section-2.2 >> >> >> udp-lite, unlike sctp, it is simple enough to work everywhere, but a >> lot of its original use case (unencrypted rtp) is gone. >> >> What, if anything is it actually used for today? > > > I am not aware any significant deployment. Well, I just tested it a little bit on v6 (with full checksum coverage). Worked. ENOTIME to pursue it further. CAPWAP was called out in the latter RFC above as a use case. > > - Mark > >> >> Are there any test >> suites or large scale tests/testers that have gone and looked at its >> actual routability over the ipv4 and ipv6 Internet? >> >> anyway, udplite seemed like a good fit for a userspace vpn or >> something like mosh, so (since I was unable to find any comprehensive >> udplite test suites) I went and implemented that as a test for fun... >> >> https://plus.google.com/u/0/107942175615993706558/posts/LDNmr8PWkFg >> >> and given how easy it is to hack in will probably try to add it to >> netperf-wrapper. Over the holidays. Maybe. >> >> -- >> Dave Täht >> >> http://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Upcoming_Talk >> >> _______________________________________________ >> homenet mailing list >> homenet@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet > > -- Dave Täht thttp://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Upcoming_Talks
- [homenet] udp-lite support? Dave Taht
- Re: [homenet] udp-lite support? Mark Townsley
- Re: [homenet] udp-lite support? Dave Taht