IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-oversized-header-chain-08.txt> (Implications of Oversized IPv6 Header Chains) to Proposed Standard

"Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> Wed, 09 October 2013 17:20 UTC

Return-Path: <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A43AF21E80A8; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 10:20:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BTzulXFa5UTY; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 10:20:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from slb-mbsout-02.boeing.com (slb-mbsout-02.boeing.com [130.76.64.129]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B88A21E805F; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 10:20:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from slb-mbsout-02.boeing.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by slb-mbsout-02.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id r99HKDXB003755; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 10:20:13 -0700
Received: from XCH-NWHT-11.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-11.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.25.114]) by slb-mbsout-02.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id r99HK9rY003654 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Wed, 9 Oct 2013 10:20:13 -0700
Received: from XCH-BLV-306.nw.nos.boeing.com (130.247.25.218) by XCH-NWHT-11.nw.nos.boeing.com (130.247.25.114) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.327.1; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 10:20:03 -0700
Received: from XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.4.29]) by XCH-BLV-306.nw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.6.159]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.011; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 10:20:02 -0700
From: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
To: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
Subject: RE: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-oversized-header-chain-08.txt> (Implications of Oversized IPv6 Header Chains) to Proposed Standard
Thread-Topic: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-oversized-header-chain-08.txt> (Implications of Oversized IPv6 Header Chains) to Proposed Standard
Thread-Index: AQHOxRAfebc9KTehbEGO6mhunuAlj5nsnKbg
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 17:20:01 +0000
Message-ID: <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831811EE66@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com>
References: <20131002185522.20697.96027.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831811AEFC@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831811BDD3@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> <9300F272-E282-41C3-9DA8-59134B975FC7@employees.org> <9e33a47bb2834c15ba4269ae8c79c46f@BLUPR05MB433.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831811EB23@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> <D1F5CE61-253E-4F07-AED1-4A4AB4C4AB68@employees.org>
In-Reply-To: <D1F5CE61-253E-4F07-AED1-4A4AB4C4AB68@employees.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [130.247.104.6]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
Cc: "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 17:20:29 -0000

Hi Ole,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ole Troan [mailto:otroan@employees.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 9:54 AM
> To: Templin, Fred L
> Cc: Ronald Bonica; ipv6@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-oversized-header-chain-08.txt>
> (Implications of Oversized IPv6 Header Chains) to Proposed Standard
> 
> Fred,
> 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Ronald Bonica [mailto:rbonica@juniper.net]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 5:46 PM
> >> To: Ole Troan; Templin, Fred L
> >> Cc: ipv6@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org
> >> Subject: RE: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-oversized-header-chain-
> 08.txt>
> >> (Implications of Oversized IPv6 Header Chains) to Proposed Standard
> >>
> >> I agree with Ole.
> >
> > How so? A tunnel that crosses a 1280 MTU link MUST fragment
> > in order to satisfy the IPv6 minMTU. If it must fragment, then
> > an MTU-length IPv6 header chain would not fit within the first
> > fragment, and we have opened an attack vector against tunnels.
> > This is not a matter to be agreed or disagreed with - it is
> > a simple fact.
> 
> right, and RFC2460 has this to say about it:
> 
>    IPv6 requires that every link in the internet have an MTU of 1280
>    octets or greater.  On any link that cannot convey a 1280-octet
>    packet in one piece, link-specific fragmentation and reassembly must
>    be provided at a layer below IPv6.

Very true. In this case, the "link" is the tunnel and the "link-specific
fragmentation" is IPv6 fragmentation. Which places the first part of an
MTU-length IPv6 header chain in the first fragment and the remainder of
the header chain in the second fragment.

Thanks - Fred
fred.l.templin@boeing.com

> cheers,
> Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email