Re: [Int-area] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-16: (with COMMENT)

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Tue, 03 September 2019 21:46 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.com>
X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38770120822; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 14:46:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 VwCIz29-hwUp; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 14:46:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fgont.go6lab.si (fgont.go6lab.si [IPv6:2001:67c:27e4::14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFBE9120841; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 14:46:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.14] (ppp-94-69-228-25.home.otenet.gr [94.69.228.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fgont.go6lab.si (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DE80B86090; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 23:45:59 +0200 (CEST)
To: "Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Cc: "int-area@ietf.org" <int-area@ietf.org>, IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Joel Halpern <joel.halpern@ericsson.com>, "draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile@ietf.org>, "intarea-chairs@ietf.org" <intarea-chairs@ietf.org>
References: <156751558566.9632.10416223948753711891.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <B7C5DF29-92B2-477B-9C30-F47E338038EE@strayalpha.com> <efabc7c9f72c4cd9a31f56de24669640@boeing.com> <9331E721-F7F8-4C22-9BE4-E266726B3702@gmail.com> <7bfbaf5fa12c4a9bac3e46ece5dfdcde@boeing.com> <0BF34BFA-5F30-4EE1-9F5E-18D9ECA8D424@gmail.com> <CALx6S37xhhS5ezhJu6-HQmftwY9cBzuCxeaW9thTbKBa2hizcw@mail.gmail.com> <4219167a-9375-ec11-95f1-5de8890acf1d@si6networks.com> <a350be1628c44ced925545d09458e827@boeing.com>
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Openpgp: preference=signencrypt
Message-ID: <273bac52-6b75-55a1-4938-b39623385b3c@si6networks.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2019 00:44:43 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <a350be1628c44ced925545d09458e827@boeing.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/14k94ugGdvhuz3beheSPgBGyC7Q>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-16: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-area/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2019 21:46:07 -0000

On 4/9/19 00:02, Templin (US), Fred L wrote:
> Fernando,
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Fernando Gont [mailto:fgont@si6networks.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2019 1:49 PM
>> To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>om>; Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
>> Cc: Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>om>; int-area@ietf.org; IESG <iesg@ietf.org>rg>; Joel Halpern
>> <joel.halpern@ericsson.com>om>; draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile@ietf.org; intarea-chairs@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [Int-area] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-16: (with COMMENT)
>>
>> On 3/9/19 23:33, Tom Herbert wrote:
>>> Bob,
>>>
>>> I agree with Fred. Note, the very first line of the introduction:
>>>
>>> "Operational experience [Kent] [Huston] [RFC7872] reveals that IP
>>> fragmentation introduces fragility to Internet communication".
>>>
>>> This attempts to frame fragmentation as being generally fragile with
>>> supporting references. However, there was much discussion on the list
>>> about operational experience that demonstrates fragmentation is not
>>> fragile.
>>
>> Discussion is not measurements. Do you have measurements that suggest
>> otherwise?
>>
>> We did separate measurements, with different methodologies, and they
>> suggest the same thing. You can discuss as much as you want. But that
>> will not make fragmentation work.
>>
>>
>>
>>> In particular, we know that fragmentation with tunnels is
>>> productively deployed and has been for quite some time. So that is the
>>> counter argument to the general statement that fragmentation is
>>> fragile. With the text about tunneling included in the introduction I
>>> believe that was sufficient balance of the arguments, but without the
>>> text the reader could be led to believe that fragmentation is fragile
>>> for everyone all the time which is simply not true and would be
>>> misleading.
>>
>> "fragile" means that it fails in an uncceptably large number of cases.
>> ~30 failure rate is not acceptable. ~20% isn't, either.
> 
> What if we fragment the payload packet instead of the delivery packet?
> Wouldn't that give a 0% failure rate?

Sure. At which point you are using ip fragmentation in a limited domain,
and that's *not* the case this document is addressing, right?

-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492