IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> Tue, 06 March 2018 19:16 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
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 13767126B6D for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Mar 2018 11:16:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.911
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 x9gqIu49_F4m for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Mar 2018 11:16:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from accordion.employees.org (accordion.employees.org [198.137.202.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F772124234 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Mar 2018 11:16:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from h.hanazo.no (96.51-175-103.customer.lyse.net [51.175.103.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by accordion.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CBCC72D5186; Tue, 6 Mar 2018 19:16:42 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by h.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0564A2021F9148; Tue, 6 Mar 2018 20:16:39 +0100 (CET)
From: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
Message-Id: <FA95FB35-C4C4-45E9-A604-8E96367BFE00@employees.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_E1081BFE-CA6F-4132-8D73-3D3810ADEE3D"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\))
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2018 20:16:38 +0100
In-Reply-To: <3B1D63EF-36E4-4AA5-B51D-36CC7614A7D9@strayalpha.com>
Cc: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>, Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>, "int-area@ietf.org" <int-area@ietf.org>
To: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
References: <BLUPR0501MB2051C0DCCE28384FCD08F7C4AEDA0@BLUPR0501MB2051.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CALx6S37q8zLQidnyFRBnQSkzFv6ZegohpCTSRnARjikbNSa_yw@mail.gmail.com> <3B1D63EF-36E4-4AA5-B51D-36CC7614A7D9@strayalpha.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/GM0VfSqshV0I--vWB21M4lIe3ks>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 06 Mar 2018 19:16:47 -0000

Joe,

> Agreed but note that draft tunnels will update that RFC in some important ways.

With other concerns than those raised in e.g. 4459 and 7597?
Unfortunately there are cases where there are no other choice than to do fragmentation/reassembly on tunnel endpoints, but still the recommendation holds.
It is so problematic, that it is strongly recommended to engineer the network to avoid that happening.

Cheers,
Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email