[homenet] udp-lite support?

Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> Sun, 21 December 2014 20:07 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 0885D1A8741 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Dec 2014 12:07:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, 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 MoTbBNouWvlt for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Dec 2014 12:07:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi0-x231.google.com (mail-oi0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE5D71A8743 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 Dec 2014 12:07:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oi0-f49.google.com with SMTP id a141so7059976oig.8 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 Dec 2014 12:07:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=wV+0vwpjtyNXHuYSRikMDXThuVI2rXkvBJ9vLoiteE4=; b=tstr6j4TBFWxmwBXIbUfNah/RiEKKMLFONPe3605GpogTk4CegIqbCOlY1yNdDAQyU Puqf4OUnnqzYy/sTI9as3QmGeZ3/IPybyTRZwjA1ar+NpBBZC7Sp+U7V2HdX0EC6a9YY fJ/ANNj1jKGYfwfTC2hlqG7kLMpInixgtaldjP7AwaQndXj65mj9D5ggRtIEshV1AyxP fnVI5r+uSNhr5oiaJN8tr9s9nzWQS38mzxieh8NcAtaZbbWq0dCbDxMeH9mwkS91u10H tLGGMFteDNiFXyQI0t2kyvIVSkjSTRf6oRmtt0ALuAU/HY/1jjF6Sfyc4XYnxZKb0LWq lPbQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.202.175.146 with SMTP id y140mr10476806oie.79.1419192467820; Sun, 21 Dec 2014 12:07:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.202.169.209 with HTTP; Sun, 21 Dec 2014 12:07:47 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 12:07:47 -0800
Message-ID: <CAA93jw5+e0u=aHCjaBjwKrqdvhfwx5MbvG2yuKvBnOtHk_5jQg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
To: HOMENET <homenet@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/LvQzfsTaQ2vcLFNQ6R5w8d8uHL0
Subject: [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: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 20:07:51 -0000

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.

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? 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