Re: [Int-area] 答复: 答复: 答复: 答复: Is the UDP destination port number resource running out?// re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-intarea-gue-04.txt

"Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> Thu, 25 May 2017 22:21 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 E25F3129B21 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 May 2017 15:21:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.221
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.221 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 PakD4l9J7Mkh for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 May 2017 15:21:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from phx-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (phx-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net [130.76.184.178]) (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 BD0FA127B52 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 May 2017 15:21:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phx-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id v4PMLtL6028666; Thu, 25 May 2017 15:21:55 -0700
Received: from XCH15-06-10.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch15-06-10.nw.nos.boeing.com [137.136.239.219]) by phx-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id v4PMLni5028518 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 25 May 2017 15:21:49 -0700
Received: from XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com (2002:8988:eede::8988:eede) by XCH15-06-10.nw.nos.boeing.com (2002:8988:efdb::8988:efdb) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1263.5; Thu, 25 May 2017 15:21:48 -0700
Received: from XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com ([137.136.238.222]) by XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com ([137.136.238.222]) with mapi id 15.00.1263.000; Thu, 25 May 2017 15:21:48 -0700
From: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
To: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
CC: "int-area@ietf.org" <int-area@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: =?utf-8?B?W0ludC1hcmVhXSDnrZTlpI06IOetlOWkjTog562U5aSNOiDnrZTlpI06IElz?= =?utf-8?B?IHRoZSBVRFAgZGVzdGluYXRpb24gcG9ydCBudW1iZXIgcmVzb3VyY2UgcnVu?= =?utf-8?B?bmluZyBvdXQ/Ly8gcmU6IEktRCBBY3Rpb246IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtaW50YXJl?= =?utf-8?Q?a-gue-04.txt?=
Thread-Index: AQHS1aVMgScevXYRJ06CTPxLhS8/mQ==
Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 22:21:48 +0000
Message-ID: <b67c23d1e45340b883788bc164968ee7@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com>
References: <149514799195.6631.3231700013200014494@ietfa.amsl.com> <a3915b87-f104-51d8-11e3-d9f8196462b5@isi.edu> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE2BBA8903@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com> <54980b3a-2dc9-2ab1-f150-45b3f500f7ac@isi.edu> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE2BBA892E@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com> <CALx6S350VcJCm4g70jycbXD3FxaGg9eF-dn61_SdVF8xmmkojg@mail.gmail.com> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE2BBA95EA@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com> <CALx6S34dQX8gGCLvR4OG70FfO7MY8CbOxB_CA-crcTmFE_zX3g@mail.gmail.com> <d1c22f64-1cab-2946-32a6-4339a197402e@isi.edu> <CALx6S365N44zV=-N3BgA9ATibfqW5G78_4cDD4EnL1muDoA04Q@mail.gmail.com> <7b56cfb4-87a9-a3c0-98ab-19acfed01da5@isi.edu> <CALx6S37SQivoYNsPnQOCvG2UpNk=_7rThD5rQP3gPmwqx+1siA@mail.gmail.com> <85610864-3b00-67b3-6d3a-db1c4ef3870b@isi.edu> <b1d251aff62c45d392c2ee8c1b3828b2@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com> <CALx6S34TqFoZHwiDJPeNhChLm5ceM6_dbkko4Uhy6MsT+snAKA@mail.gmail.com> <9657c82a-7314-878e-1559-cc81ed3c2241@isi.edu>
In-Reply-To: <9657c82a-7314-878e-1559-cc81ed3c2241@isi.edu>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [137.136.248.6]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/VYhipqvHZSr42HPuypCYrSTfzP8>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] =?utf-8?b?562U5aSNOiDnrZTlpI06IOetlOWkjTog562U5aSN?= =?utf-8?q?=3A_Is_the_UDP_destination_port_number_resource_running_out=3F/?= =?utf-8?q?/_re=3A_I-D_Action=3A_draft-ietf-intarea-gue-04=2Etxt?=
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: Thu, 25 May 2017 22:21:59 -0000

Joe,

I am for whatever allows us to do direct encapsulation (i.e., IP/UDP/IP with NULL GUE header)
in the simplest way possible. I'm not too concerned with future-proofing it; is that what you
are worried about?

Thanks - Fred

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Touch [mailto:touch@isi.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2017 3:14 PM
> To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>om>; Templin, Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
> Cc: int-area@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Int-area] 答复: 答复: 答复: 答复: Is the UDP destination port number resource running out?// re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-
> intarea-gue-04.txt
> 
> 
> 
> On 5/25/2017 1:40 PM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> > On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Templin, Fred L
> > <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:
> >> If you are talking about the GUE direct encapsulation of IPv4 and IPv6, I
> >> agree
> >>
> >> with the current spec and that direct encapsulation (i.e., with no
> >> additional
> >>
> >> encapsulations between the IP/UDP and inner IP headers) is desirable and
> >>
> >> should remain as part of the spec. I think we may be over-thinking this.
> >>
> > +1. I think a little too much has been inferred beyond the what is
> > actually in draft. Versions are straightforward:
> >
> > - There is a two bit version number field that begins GUE header. The
> > format of the rest of the header depends on the version.
> > - Version 0 defines an encapsulation header that encapsulates by IP
> > protocol number.
> > - Version 1 defined a means for direct encapsulation of select
> > protocols as an optimization. Formats for IPv4 and IPv6 are defined.
> > - Version 2 and 3 are reserved
> I continue to be confused as to why it is more useful to try to make
> decisions based on the first two bits rather than the first four.
> There's near zero benefit, and the harm is that you end up with only two
> reserved versions.
> 
> >
> > Rather Version 1 constitutes a new version or a different format seems
> > to be a matter of terminology, however semantically and implementation
> > wise the intent is clear. If it's necessary the field could be renamed
> > "version/format"
> It is not a version; I think that's at least part of the problem. It's a
> type or kind, but version implies that V0 is superceded by V1, which may
> or may not be backward compatible with V0.
> 
> Joe
> 
>