Re: [Int-area] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-16: (with COMMENT)

"Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> Tue, 03 September 2019 21:02 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 A2514120839; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 14:02:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 QgI39e-WshRt; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 14:02:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net [130.76.144.162]) (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 133B01208ED; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 14:02:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id x83L2UqO006090; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 17:02:30 -0400
Received: from XCH16-07-10.nos.boeing.com (xch16-07-10.nos.boeing.com [144.115.66.112]) by clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id x83L2SOB006056 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 3 Sep 2019 17:02:28 -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 15.1.1713.5; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 14:02:27 -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 15.01.1713.004; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 14:02:27 -0700
From: "Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
CC: "int-area@ietf.org" <int-area@ietf.org>, IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "Joel Halpern" <joel.halpern@ericsson.com>, "draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile@ietf.org>, "intarea-chairs@ietf.org" <intarea-chairs@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Int-area] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-16: (with COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHVYleCBj1oQLuY7U2rnGqsdj7a9acaci8A//+QwwCAAJHEgP//wU8wgAAXiWGAAALCEA==
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 21:02:27 +0000
Message-ID: <a350be1628c44ced925545d09458e827@boeing.com>
References: <156751558566.9632.10416223948753711891.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <B7C5DF29-92B2-477B-9C30-F47E338038EE@strayalpha.com> <efabc7c9f72c4cd9a31f56de24669640@boeing.com> <9331E721-F7F8-4C22-9BE4-E266726B3702@gmail.com> <7bfbaf5fa12c4a9bac3e46ece5dfdcde@boeing.com> <0BF34BFA-5F30-4EE1-9F5E-18D9ECA8D424@gmail.com> <CALx6S37xhhS5ezhJu6-HQmftwY9cBzuCxeaW9thTbKBa2hizcw@mail.gmail.com> <4219167a-9375-ec11-95f1-5de8890acf1d@si6networks.com>
In-Reply-To: <4219167a-9375-ec11-95f1-5de8890acf1d@si6networks.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: 63DD6DEDDA68BE33D31C1646808356491BF26D041A534303D599D3085A4360E22000:8
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/i4O3RneQ3QZoX4zpIEfqOFp0aa0>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-16: (with COMMENT)
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: Tue, 03 Sep 2019 21:02:39 -0000

Fernando,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fernando Gont [mailto:fgont@si6networks.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2019 1:49 PM
> To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>om>; Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
> Cc: Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>om>; int-area@ietf.org; IESG <iesg@ietf.org>rg>; Joel Halpern
> <joel.halpern@ericsson.com>om>; draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile@ietf.org; intarea-chairs@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Int-area] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-16: (with COMMENT)
> 
> On 3/9/19 23:33, Tom Herbert wrote:
> > Bob,
> >
> > I agree with Fred. Note, the very first line of the introduction:
> >
> > "Operational experience [Kent] [Huston] [RFC7872] reveals that IP
> > fragmentation introduces fragility to Internet communication".
> >
> > This attempts to frame fragmentation as being generally fragile with
> > supporting references. However, there was much discussion on the list
> > about operational experience that demonstrates fragmentation is not
> > fragile.
> 
> Discussion is not measurements. Do you have measurements that suggest
> otherwise?
> 
> We did separate measurements, with different methodologies, and they
> suggest the same thing. You can discuss as much as you want. But that
> will not make fragmentation work.
> 
> 
> 
> > In particular, we know that fragmentation with tunnels is
> > productively deployed and has been for quite some time. So that is the
> > counter argument to the general statement that fragmentation is
> > fragile. With the text about tunneling included in the introduction I
> > believe that was sufficient balance of the arguments, but without the
> > text the reader could be led to believe that fragmentation is fragile
> > for everyone all the time which is simply not true and would be
> > misleading.
> 
> "fragile" means that it fails in an uncceptably large number of cases.
> ~30 failure rate is not acceptable. ~20% isn't, either.

What if we fragment the payload packet instead of the delivery packet?
Wouldn't that give a 0% failure rate?

Fred

> > But the "problem" of fragmentation is in intermediate devices that
> > don't properly handle it as the draft highlights. So it seems like
> > part of addressing the problem should also be to fix the problem! That
> > is implementations should be fixed to deal with fragmentation.
> 
> The same logic would solve the problem of widespread famine, and others.
> I don't think that logic has solved any real problems in the real world.
> 
> --
> Fernando Gont
> SI6 Networks
> e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
> PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
> 
> 
>