Re: [Int-area] Tunnels and Fragmentation

"Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> Fri, 17 April 2020 17:28 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 C191E3A0917 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 10:28:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=boeing.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 62wVRZXLUGoZ for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 10:28:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clt-mbsout-02.mbs.boeing.net (clt-mbsout-02.mbs.boeing.net [130.76.144.163]) (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 0F6FD3A0848 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 10:23:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by clt-mbsout-02.mbs.boeing.net (8.15.2/8.15.2/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id 03HHNlvP026958; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 13:23:48 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=boeing.com; s=boeing-s1912; t=1587144228; bh=HlFGC6vyNxeNkjzUSC0k5cfRoEU9GGZN56sIsMaRSDQ=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=f6OYHn3ML6n3rWIp9MTc18NU0blA+4lq9Cdoj8e0FSGIEc4IJoKnRKCDlTR4RP+jq MecCTP6mZ1yuoe7SfAB4Zqcs7zFT8XVkPhxmlVqURKmZfgu0xxqtcouFAk7z6gNdhx dawFOnD7HyEOCQ98MDj9hN92AzrR0S73PsLbJqRMy76ld+DkU5Ez9FNDaPDgOBnkec /xIOqtYU+UpRDHnc4+0hMoczIQ1SPFTPYiqzcdakPnpVdF1loWAu55f+RjS5Y92Wkx 9T1KvG/defCeJPXhyszixewjBCqqiBNaHxxT+m5GTtMUb76J3MTw5zBImYfv/cZkHs PGi1ENAzP4lzA==
Received: from XCH16-07-10.nos.boeing.com (xch16-07-10.nos.boeing.com [144.115.66.112]) by clt-mbsout-02.mbs.boeing.net (8.15.2/8.15.2/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTPS id 03HHNa39025784 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 17 Apr 2020 13:23:36 -0400
Received: from XCH16-07-10.nos.boeing.com (144.115.66.112) by XCH16-07-10.nos.boeing.com (144.115.66.112) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.1.1979.3; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 10:23:35 -0700
Received: from XCH16-07-10.nos.boeing.com ([fe80::1522:f068:5766:53b5]) by XCH16-07-10.nos.boeing.com ([fe80::1522:f068:5766:53b5%2]) with mapi id 15.01.1979.003; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 10:23:35 -0700
From: "Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
To: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
CC: "int-area@ietf.org" <int-area@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Int-area] Tunnels and Fragmentation
Thread-Index: AdYUMQEltsg04BNrQGSfK4Hyznn5XQA4DKMAAA11RyA=
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 17:23:35 +0000
Message-ID: <2053570c8e0343ed818bea1e81fb6e9b@boeing.com>
References: <85c46613772e439881e079a0037eb866@boeing.com> <9839CEEF-DC95-4AEA-9495-1BC42B241DD2@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <9839CEEF-DC95-4AEA-9495-1BC42B241DD2@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: 6F27649B764BE058A3499CB40C509414EB3C8BA1629F2D702EC637F39821C3F52000:8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/Hr5yuXreW_FfG9O_5g0OZJDa3bs>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Tunnels and Fragmentation
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, 17 Apr 2020 17:28:24 -0000

Hi Bob,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Hinden [mailto:bob.hinden@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 17, 2020 9:38 AM
> To: Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
> Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>om>; int-area@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Int-area] Tunnels and Fragmentation
> 
> Fred,
> 
> > On Apr 16, 2020, at 2:36 PM, Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi, two important documents in this wg have been sitting idle for a long time and
> > perhaps it is time to start moving them forward again. The documents are: "IP
> > Fragmentation Considered Fragile", and "IP Tunnels in the Internet Architecture":
> >
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile/
> 
> This doc is in the RFC Editor queue waiting for another document, it’s not “sitting idle".  It is essentially done.  The referenced
> document (draft-fairhurst-tsvwg-datagram-plpmtud) looks like it was approved by the IESG recently, it’s state is "Approved-
> announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed”.  Should be done soon.

Hold the phone. We now have a  robust and useful case for IPv6 fragmentation when
applied to tunnels. Can we still update frag-fragile before it gets published? Or, do we
have to wait and update it *after* it gets published? I would prefer before, because
allowing to publish as-is with knowledge that an important update is coming just
perpetuates the undeserved bad name given to fragmentation 33 years ago.

Also, what about intarea-tunnels? That one shows up as expired, but shouldn't we
dust it off for publication too (after updating to accommodate new findings)?

Thanks - Fred

> Bob
> 
> 
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-intarea-tunnels/
> >
> > What has changed is that we now have  a spec for robust fragmentation over tunnels
> > while supporting a 9180 MTU (actually MRU) plus lossless path MTU discovery. The
> > spec is known as the Overlay Multilink Network (OMNI) Interface:
> >
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-templin-6man-omni-interface/
> >
> > So, what I think needs to happen is for authors of the two intarea drafts to review
> > the OMNI spec and update their documents accordingly. Then, maybe we can get
> > a few docs published?
> >
> > Thanks - Fred
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Int-area mailing list
> > Int-area@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area