IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Int-area] Comments on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-06

"Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> Thu, 31 January 2019 15:53 UTC

Return-Path: <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.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 C9D26124408 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Jan 2019 07:53:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.19
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.19 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01] 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 wOKPsEB1XArw for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Jan 2019 07:53:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net [130.76.144.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17F5B123FFD for <int-area@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 Jan 2019 07:53:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id x0VFrh2r026669; Thu, 31 Jan 2019 10:53:43 -0500
Received: from XCH16-07-09.nos.boeing.com (xch16-07-09.nos.boeing.com [144.115.66.111]) by clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id x0VFrbuX025613 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 31 Jan 2019 10:53:37 -0500
Received: from XCH16-07-10.nos.boeing.com (144.115.66.112) by XCH16-07-09.nos.boeing.com (144.115.66.111) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.1.1591.10; Thu, 31 Jan 2019 07:53:36 -0800
Received: from XCH16-07-10.nos.boeing.com ([fe80::e065:4e77:ac47:d9a8]) by XCH16-07-10.nos.boeing.com ([fe80::e065:4e77:ac47:d9a8%2]) with mapi id 15.01.1591.012; Thu, 31 Jan 2019 07:53:36 -0800
From: "Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
To: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>, Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
CC: int-area <int-area@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Int-area] Comments on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-06
Thread-Index: AQHUuCuxLuPn/vC+bky5xmwg6zRJFKXIYdIA//+kMiCAAJ8tAP//fVEwgACIOgD//3pzkAAQ9oUAABCBjHAAEBaogAAFL8ow
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:53:36 +0000
Message-ID: <8193e78fdb8f449588ea6f3d43c939e1@boeing.com>
References: <CALx6S35kwvHL5iE4Ci10LQbPzun3k1C-T4m5B55yAyL+nP4sdQ@mail.gmail.com> <3B29EAA5-5989-4A8F-857B-3DEF63A7FEA7@gmail.com> <538a3580-dd3a-a778-dda0-bfc30f749bd9@gmail.com> <751bf1d2e6f94e98a5f9bafad3b27bf4@boeing.com> <a3136fb8-2c5b-5c53-bde1-f29cd55641e2@gmail.com> <6adb543c1bb447f5931450d74484027b@boeing.com> <40859995-4cc6-9758-f1b4-2a2404768f30@gmail.com> <c578dcf90f09482e9ca8ba190aeffd7a@boeing.com> <9565bc68-5004-d633-31b1-025521d83c1b@gmail.com> <e1ff8507ffb8495aaff683d7218c8d98@boeing.com> <34ebdeb2-94f9-ba11-f220-df994bca306a@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <34ebdeb2-94f9-ba11-f220-df994bca306a@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [137.137.12.6]
x-tm-snts-smtp: 16C06AB9CE8E4A0C7D1A0785B34C9ABB88ED6C14926D623B82161CC6332872802000:8
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_8193e78fdb8f449588ea6f3d43c939e1boeingcom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/4a0DsNSG1J_GnTYrJ_QTxq5w_dQ>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Comments on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-06
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: Thu, 31 Jan 2019 15:53:48 -0000

Hi Stewart,

Check section 4.5 and 6.4 of the latest draft version:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-08

Also, RFC4963 provides a detailed study of "IPv4 Reassembly Errors at
High Data Rates".

But, there is more to it besides just the question of whether to use IP
reassembly or higher layer reassembly. There must be some way for
the sender that inserts the UDP encapsulation to know that the receiver
is capable of removing the encapsulation. So, there must be some form
of tunnel endpoint coordination because, after all, it is really just another
type of tunnel.

Thanks - Fred

From: Stewart Bryant [mailto:stewart.bryant@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2019 2:16 AM
To: Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>; Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>; Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Cc: int-area <int-area@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Comments on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-06



On 30/01/2019 18:55, Templin (US), Fred L wrote:
IP fragmentation shortcomings
(e.g., reassembly errors at high data rates).

How big a problem is this in reality?

If you are going to run at speed you ought to set a conservatively low MTU?

I am always told that the core runs jumbo anyway, so where does the problem arise in practical networks?

- Stewart

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email