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> Wed, 04 September 2019 13:46 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 202BA120100; Wed, 4 Sep 2019 06:46:12 -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 uEo3aUXYP-w6; Wed, 4 Sep 2019 06:46:10 -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 0DFEE1200F3; Wed, 4 Sep 2019 06:46:09 -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 x84Dk7BT017034; Wed, 4 Sep 2019 09:46:08 -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 x84Dk2wc016872 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 4 Sep 2019 09:46:02 -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; Wed, 4 Sep 2019 06:46:00 -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; Wed, 4 Sep 2019 06:46:00 -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//wU8wgAAXiWGAAALCEIAAgfGAgACWxRA=
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2019 13:46:00 +0000
Message-ID: <0c07dda545e94847b09012f0464d0f9d@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> <a350be1628c44ced925545d09458e827@boeing.com> <273bac52-6b75-55a1-4938-b39623385b3c@si6networks.com>
In-Reply-To: <273bac52-6b75-55a1-4938-b39623385b3c@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: D816A46D5E19507CBEB06F595C48CF029BE719C433C50E5D9629349352153FF42000:8
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/mu2_x4JnXgnDSGM2mICLohtyitg>
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: Wed, 04 Sep 2019 13:46:13 -0000

Hi Fernando,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fernando Gont [mailto:fgont@si6networks.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2019 2:45 PM
> To: Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>om>; Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>om>; Bob Hinden
> <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
> Cc: 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 4/9/19 00:02, Templin (US), Fred L wrote:
> > 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?
> 
> Sure. At which point you are using ip fragmentation in a limited domain,
> and that's *not* the case this document is addressing, right?

As I just answered to Ole, it is not only for limited domains but also for over
the open Internet. The fragmentation footprint is the same as the tunnel
footprint.

Fred

> --
> Fernando Gont
> SI6 Networks
> e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
> PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
> 
> 
>