Re: [Int-area] WG Adoption Call: IP Fragmentation Considered Fragile

"Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke@cisco.com> Wed, 25 July 2018 08:16 UTC

Return-Path: <evyncke@cisco.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 677E6130F96; Wed, 25 Jul 2018 01:16:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 gqcGtI9LIEBy; Wed, 25 Jul 2018 01:16:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0937130FCB; Wed, 25 Jul 2018 01:16:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1422; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1532506613; x=1533716213; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=VyVGE502UlCRszQLupTzEPCPz1l+NRin9VLAYHXojDQ=; b=jEumB45GfZFIZn2LsgCykwUR8RTG8ii7EapADYx0kq0DPf1xaMrY3/TG IDvliIvmvFGJ13cyNJdr7ZsiwknOiTrSMol1MGSWQE/T4PolxAXBTV3Q1 rztKlaUdszhwA3a2Gn99wdWLfOA5R7ncxSvbXW6YQnAqHzqNkP1hOhYab E=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0DNAgDTMFhb/4gNJK1bGQEBAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAQcBAQEBAYNNY38oCoN0iAaMPYFoJIM7hQSNCYF6CxgLhEkCF4JDITQ?= =?us-ascii?q?YAQIBAQIBAQJtHAyFNwEBAQIBAQEhEToLEAIBCBoCJgICAh8GCxUQAgQBDQW?= =?us-ascii?q?DIAGBZwMNCA+vXYEuhxQNgy4FgQuHdxeBQT+BOAwTgkyCVkUBAYFgF4JqMYI?= =?us-ascii?q?kAplHKwkCjCaDDI17ixeGaQIRFIEkHTiBUnAVOyoBgj6LFYU+bwGMboEbAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.51,400,1526342400"; d="scan'208";a="147971476"
Received: from alln-core-3.cisco.com ([173.36.13.136]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 Jul 2018 08:16:53 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-014.cisco.com (xch-rtp-014.cisco.com [64.101.220.154]) by alln-core-3.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id w6P8GrCV011456 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 25 Jul 2018 08:16:53 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-014.cisco.com (64.101.220.154) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Wed, 25 Jul 2018 04:16:52 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Wed, 25 Jul 2018 04:16:52 -0400
From: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke@cisco.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Wassim Haddad <wassim.haddad@ericsson.com>, "internet-area@ietf.org" <int-area@ietf.org>
CC: "intarea-chairs@ietf.org" <intarea-chairs@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Int-area] WG Adoption Call: IP Fragmentation Considered Fragile
Thread-Index: AQHUI4aGFkqwG7lztkapJHj3/IpHTqSfjbcAgAAK6AA=
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 08:16:52 +0000
Message-ID: <0178C2F2-0D68-48CB-8385-2F4DCEB9C9E6@cisco.com>
References: <F227637E-B12D-45AA-AD69-74C947409012@ericsson.com> <9fe7b797-3442-5a00-6e77-a8c3a1ec4617@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <9fe7b797-3442-5a00-6e77-a8c3a1ec4617@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.e.1.180613
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.55.56.6]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <EEC36CD3960FC34A91289AE93B5F42B2@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 64.101.220.154, xch-rtp-014.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-3.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/8wH2f5zo7VS_z5YgicjrFxjNjo8>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] WG Adoption Call: IP Fragmentation Considered Fragile
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 08:16:57 -0000

+1 for WG adoption

The document will need some review though (cfr Brian's valid point below)

-éric

On 25/07/2018, 05:38, "Int-area on behalf of Brian E Carpenter" <int-area-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:

    +1 for adoption.
    
    However, I am a bit concerned about this key recommendation:
    
    >    Application developers SHOULD NOT develop applications that rely on
    >    IPv6 fragmentation
    
    It isn't obvious to me that this is an algorithmic requirement. If the
    application runs over TCP, how does the developer ensure that TCP will
    use an MSS that avoids the need for fragmentation? (The UDP situation
    is a bit clearer, but RFC8085 introduces considerable complexity, unless
    we accept that the Internet MTU for UDP is 576 or 1280.)
    
    Regards
       Brian
    
    _______________________________________________
    Int-area mailing list
    Int-area@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area