Re: [Int-area] Warren Kumari's Yes on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-15: (with COMMENT)

Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> Fri, 09 August 2019 14:48 UTC

Return-Path: <tom@herbertland.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 8812512008F for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 07:48:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 IcGTASrkgK_o for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 07:48:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x544.google.com (mail-ed1-x544.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::544]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E128120090 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 07:48:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x544.google.com with SMTP id s49so60443364edb.1 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Fri, 09 Aug 2019 07:48:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ztJmwVzfQyIwK5unMyOg4nx/GeyFkbyJ2ttZXJByyGI=; b=IdFBLdZuTTQ3pvAVcSMg30kaAZirCpcOSrqZd97XmMR5JXlxhRbmhKFZ533ctlC49g ysKjqZbSS4HUiDTjBf8Q6kvpRg0kQhD6T7wOZQrXtk1qjA3de/qq5E5wpzJ6+DZHQzL2 f5spU7wcCu/0SD8R+DQEw01AaxjwkBhVoeTUO/lUitCe3CWpLBfhQ4Gq0Hp4QtuzLOzP SGeHPsKhfhwxM1keKM5y3eKaVXicl58xMflM8xRrCyiZ1ReOaOaqgLaJ+5GlvL5OzgNa 7Dyyyuybhx/UvhPHpP+L/uccJlUEIp+mYDGjSATzuJ2mzVvb+APxh/ysbWxbQ+eqvXdE ZyMw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ztJmwVzfQyIwK5unMyOg4nx/GeyFkbyJ2ttZXJByyGI=; b=CegiVz6nf0wv+3gdK3eKFmCJWRmKxXeq7eLs1rwSzHhFK6syopftGJXjjx1IxNP43X DIjb2cVW8nV934ZWaQ27kD4G1w2lbrz3S+6DplYS6s0+LuAWPO8cMP6AQhkBzRvT3YGZ Y20u2hKy8Kb3VYIaC8o5KeoJT0iYOgjvien6HRMwUvnVrMz/OIhTPprKR2tR4GgGqUeH KvFKf/W8ylOzKnaClUexvckKgxZ+guG2OYKfzubXGKqbl38lmb1uUnbOHmVAngEFu/Ck Vy3QgkjPiQPQK53Xm4fHK0fOtWg1AyQoWCRuW24s4TaEEF5/oq5xXlYb4FaoGsD8bpsh UPWw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUz8PnH0XZsdMWfWj4oiScLshyXRDkYChDVOaVJQLMVcDgXZuEl nKA8ojNnBsfUMVXbe3Z8rSFTG1vpIJ2smMuGBn0vDQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxxUk+xVO1XOjtW4ZUmce38Ehz2cPVWTV+42OAPEtxfMsxzT3evnan5QQK+s+RMxdNYQoFDPqo2aLbPfu/4YwQ=
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:dad6:: with SMTP id x22mr22226875eds.122.1565362084752; Fri, 09 Aug 2019 07:48:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <156521509577.8240.8098670537067900006.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <ad0fd2fd-09a8-3e44-d6ec-6fabc5312892@si6networks.com>
In-Reply-To: <ad0fd2fd-09a8-3e44-d6ec-6fabc5312892@si6networks.com>
From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Aug 2019 07:47:53 -0700
Message-ID: <CALx6S34XCRrsbMnzrrJK3zGLOd02B2VQKq_mVA3TW2zqj0O6aw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Cc: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Joel Halpern <joel.halpern@ericsson.com>, draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile@ietf.org, int-area <int-area@ietf.org>, intarea-chairs <intarea-chairs@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/3g6LfpPgJRGop1B3HOJKqJf0M-c>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Warren Kumari's Yes on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-15: (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: Fri, 09 Aug 2019 14:48:11 -0000

On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 3:56 AM Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> wrote:
>
> On 8/8/19 00:58, Warren Kumari via Datatracker wrote:
> > Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for
> > draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-15: Yes
> >
> > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> > introductory paragraph, however.)
> >
> >
> > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> >
> >
> > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile/
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > COMMENT:
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > It's very seldom that I ballot Yes on a document for which I'm not the
> > Responsible AD, but this is important enough that I'm doing so; unfortunately
> > there are are some bits which make me uncomfortable though, and so I spent a
> > while in the unusual situation of trying to decide between DISCUSS and YES -
> > after looking at the author list and responsible AD I'm sure that my comments
> > will be considered, and so I'm balloting Yes.
> >
> > 1: "Legacy protocols that depend upon IP fragmentation SHOULD be updated to
> > remove that dependency." I really don't like the  SHOULD here -- while I fully
> > agree that legacy protocols should be update, the RFC2119 usage feels weird -
> > it's unclear exactly who it is aimed at (everyone? the people who wrote the
> > legacy protocols? some mythical cleanup author?)
>
> The tricky bit here is that throughout the document we employ RFC2119
> language to quote requirements from other RFCs, while in this specific
> case we use caps to stress that this is the advice we are giving out.
>
> FWIW, the advice hopefully triggers work for any protocols expected to
> work across the Internet, and that currently rely on fragmentation.
>
Fernando,

As the document highlights the problems of fragmentation are caused by
nonconformant middlebox implementations. There is nothing inherently
wrong with the fragmentation and end hosts don't a problem with it.
IMO, this is just one example of (some) middleboxes arbitrarily
breaking end to end protocols. I am hopeful that document will also
trigger work to start fixing fix broken middlebox implementations.

Tom

> --
> Fernando Gont
> SI6 Networks
> e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
> PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> Int-area@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area