Re: [Int-area] 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

Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> Sat, 20 May 2017 16:00 UTC

Return-Path: <tom@herbertland.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 81E63129431 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 20 May 2017 09:00:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 03WgZ024E3Rc for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 20 May 2017 09:00:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x230.google.com (mail-qt0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 002E3129401 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Sat, 20 May 2017 09:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x230.google.com with SMTP id v27so77274876qtg.2 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Sat, 20 May 2017 09:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=BB1gu4cVnIwl6q3wMvvsYiVuRfaBxjwOveotNnk8HqU=; b=AS0UeTK4tQDwS+1bj29XJxaQ70+LvB4JyoknaQlJQ2gOHD8l5JhmcqLO1lD8z6WpVz Siyplw4slYYhy1jsqAeckMP5cFlzXyzspG+uLbpxqfU9nk+sKVngt2JtLC9GUr0PT7qP pU+hjrEG2mSCCP0JpoNMTUdWjfhhBX90FgknoAMR8VjORknSYfBv9bGSBiEsVElMxBc1 o8J2eJRw5U3r3bzVKkSaj1sOuJmdREH+HL425RoKsom026ct9r/wqeU6gxT0kLfFyNmY LdF4HFAkoUR33eDe0o99grn0fPDcruyfGyWtjoyrj3H1cTamrGUNlIlh92Ft4PZYICgu +F+A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=BB1gu4cVnIwl6q3wMvvsYiVuRfaBxjwOveotNnk8HqU=; b=VtpHKkGZMtZLdAfepbaKVl41UThk11MZGYvpJUUbGqVash51yDLt+y3QP+Ow52YaNx 43WTW6WGNbNcyLoSa8jevjqkopccHhlu860wJEeii4C7q9Vx/lYrvMJKPC4lZFUoLjgU vfqWPUDsoA0KmMTG8GqvIMS844EFgnQa2DZRLRGiyXefklYiQasQI4NXXf1whvuiKpNM J9GlAiViCWLDjDQYVdLOfJa0uLhBRD3J1ZAHsCdXCMgy6uzW4ZUIZa6NXwcCnjhlzEZo wegxQAgN0rUCn23fnhyunwKFDKETJnwuM2/qnrAJmdumExqQBlzQLli5JD21FRmhgGI8 Eykg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcCH7aKdX/Udi69ZZRlt3SpbMjtfjMAizqL917AN8xloAJj9BN6S TYXICN6GSx6zh6WqUr4GEpCybKVAN4PM
X-Received: by 10.200.43.33 with SMTP id 30mr13907253qtu.210.1495296036114; Sat, 20 May 2017 09:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.97.10 with HTTP; Sat, 20 May 2017 09:00:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE2BBA892E@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com>
References: <149514799195.6631.3231700013200014494@ietfa.amsl.com> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE2BBA82B7@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com> <CALx6S37nrJNGLdRHWx9DYNQyS54YdwLCXcG9Mp3zi4L_wrr6=g@mail.gmail.com> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE2BBA8877@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.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>
From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 09:00:35 -0700
Message-ID: <CALx6S350VcJCm4g70jycbXD3FxaGg9eF-dn61_SdVF8xmmkojg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com>
Cc: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>, "int-area@ietf.org" <int-area@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/zX0LGpGuasHrB7WsYewXaX2Uv6c>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] =?utf-8?b?562U5aSNOiDnrZTlpI06ICDnrZTlpI06IElzIHRo?= =?utf-8?q?e_UDP_destination_port_number_resource_running_out=3F//_re=3A_I?= =?utf-8?q?-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: Sat, 20 May 2017 16:00:38 -0000

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 11:09 PM, Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com> wrote:
>
>
>> -----邮件原件-----
>> 发件人: Joe Touch [mailto:touch@isi.edu]
>> 发送时间: 2017年5月20日 12:15
>> 收件人: Xuxiaohu; Tom Herbert
>> 抄送: int-area@ietf.org
>> 主题: Re: 答复: [Int-area] 答复: Is the UDP destination port number resource
>> running out?// re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-intarea-gue-04.txt
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/19/2017 8:57 PM, Xuxiaohu wrote:
>> > Hi Joe,
>> >
>> >> -----邮件原件-----
>> >> 发件人: Joe Touch [mailto:touch@isi.edu]
>> >> 发送时间: 2017年5月20日 11:41
>> >> 收件人: Xuxiaohu; Tom Herbert
>> >> 抄送: int-area@ietf.org
>> >> 主题: Re: [Int-area] 答复: Is the UDP destination port number resource
>> >> running out?// re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-intarea-gue-04.txt
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 5/19/2017 6:39 PM, Xuxiaohu wrote:
>> >>> If the saving is beneficial, it'd better to assign a dedicated port
>> >>> number for each UDP payload type( e.g., IP packet), rather than
>> >>> combining the UDP port number dedicated for GUE and the version
>> >>> field within the GUE header together to indicate whether the UDP
>> >>> payload is GUE or IP (or even other payload type if the GUE is
>> >>> devoted to help save the UDP port number resource for the IETF
>> >>> community:))
>> >> FWIW, IANA strives to assign one port for a service.
>> > Great. Hence IPvx should be taken as a service rather than taking IPvx and
>> GUE as a service, IMO.
>> GUE is supposed to be both signalling and content (data), where the data are IP
>> packets.
>
> Since IANA strives to assign one port for a service, IP packet within the UDP tunnel should be assigned a dedicated port. In other words, GUE and IP-in-UDP are distinguished by the different port numbers.
>
>> Take away the IP part and GUE isn't an E anymore.
>> >> Services are expected to have version fields and subtype
>> >> demultiplexing indicators, to so that all message variants of current
>> >> and future versions can use a single port number.
>> > Sure, the version field within the IPvx packet could be used for demultiplexing
>> purpose.
>>
>> That demultiplexes within IPvx. There still needs to be a way to demultiplex
>> non-IPvx packets (control) from IPvx.
>
> Since GUE and IP-in-UDP have different UDP port numbers, I don't know why there is still a need to demultiplex GUE and IP-in-UDP.
>
It's header compression. Consider a scenario that GUE is tunneling
IPv6 and IPv4 and will do GUE fragmentation if necessary on tunnel
ingress.  So some packets will have a fragmentation option and some
won't. For unfragmented packets with no GUE options, they can be sent
in direct encapsulation of IP. This could be done as version 1 of GUE
or in IP-in-UDP as you're suggesting. The problem with the latter is
that it doubles the number of flows in the network. So instead of
punching one hole for a tunnel in a firewall we need two (the fragment
tunnel and non-fragment UDP ports). Packets in individual flows now
can take different paths depending on whether they're fragmented so
this introduces OOO.

Tom

> Xiaohu
>
>> Joe