IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Int-area] I-D Action: draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-00.txt

Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Thu, 16 August 2018 12:19 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.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 83490130E53 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 05:19:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.99
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.99 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_NONE=-0.0001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strayalpha.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 fUOllHtsCqck for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 05:19:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server217-3.web-hosting.com (server217-3.web-hosting.com [198.54.115.226]) (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 CA593130DC5 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 05:19:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=To:References:Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:From:Subject:Mime-Version: Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=p+n5yWS6FxVP4GrIBjjXDMbLVPxLetCBeru/xwqVc+w=; b=Y/rpBlq9fMDdQDca5RfK/h+2X eAs9IHbb2A0iX6qhp1RAOCmRcc2gqTfhzkHtw8az2XxGQlLUqOQcka3abl1+iNOTv+cNgSg7MwPd5 IECgb7RNCNZzTjszqIxYkpe0SW86DzlHHsP4/9j0TM6Pl71cMyUVgWDNrNhYySJ8XnG8lLdZnsias eMx0oE1ot3yoiy229gwQSf0jMWhXhvja7Mvp0mXxg7nyosDl3y0sJGYuOGeXQumdr6+R6YCzR/V5k 2xbA1xKJNrgluKE/j8SJcyJs1tyqXR108lcFiD1YCq5EduqMfUypgvjuf+CemgozHFsMGoI2u/fWF J5pU5TD9w==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-240-132.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.240.132]:57158 helo=[192.168.1.16]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1fqHF2-003Mbv-GI; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 08:19:05 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (15G77)
In-Reply-To: <AE241D6E-2379-4EFB-802C-BFBC840273E7@employees.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 05:19:04 -0700
Cc: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>, int-area@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2BB8A510-DEA7-4543-9FF4-6D82D5ADBA53@strayalpha.com>
References: <153434872145.14477.17942361917248825531@ietfa.amsl.com> <2c82b61e-8017-742e-764b-559f2ec4bd37@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1808160735400.19688@uplift.swm.pp.se> <AE241D6E-2379-4EFB-802C-BFBC840273E7@employees.org>
To: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/cHSsyVZT1RyO72K4UBtjOZ6CQyQ>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] I-D Action: draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-00.txt
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: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 12:19:08 -0000


> On Aug 16, 2018, at 1:57 AM, Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> wrote:
> 
> IPv4 fragments do have a higher drop probability than other packets. Just from the fact that multiple end-users are sharing a 16 bit identifier space.

It’s really the fact that NATs that process fragments don’t reassemble before translating and/or don’t rate limit fragments they generate as already required by 791 (as explained in 6884).

A NAT that is broken isn’t helping users share addresses. It’s just broken.

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email