IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPsec] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-intermediate-09: (with COMMENT)

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Tue, 01 March 2022 14:45 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8D413A0A9A; Tue, 1 Mar 2022 06:45:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.226
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.226 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS=3.335, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org
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 3D00JghBQqtD; Tue, 1 Mar 2022 06:45:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [91.190.195.94]) (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 048783A0A97; Tue, 1 Mar 2022 06:45:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [195.65.18.132]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 28EFF1D2F07; Tue, 1 Mar 2022 16:45:07 +0200 (EET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1646145907; bh=PGfd0is7dxqEtAyIwl9VhxdVgnBQvDGsjotSr5MuVv4=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=H+G+eiLduyX2LlOGrUN//sengfaFstTQeYvIy16fk77g2uFbQpYPI4FccU5U7qTpa QXbVnv2zqy05zsP24HUXAgGtwjdusgZavCZLEWVVlvZ5UGf38nHtgpK7Hxgqi0k/2f /pucv955bqGF9thucI6iNFFekWapP0eGKgaAyIkI=
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_0FD23DB1-2DB2-4B92-8B5E-848DB2A281FB"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.60.0.1.1\))
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
In-Reply-To: <03fa01d82d73$af375e40$0da61ac0$@elvis.ru>
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2022 15:45:06 +0100
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, ipsec@ietf.org, ipsecme-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-intermediate@ietf.org, ynir.ietf@gmail.com
Message-Id: <975E8857-BED9-4DF8-B069-C7CB3CEF954A@eggert.org>
References: <164612839381.20180.12376957342381821650@ietfa.amsl.com> <03fa01d82d73$af375e40$0da61ac0$@elvis.ru>
To: Valery Smyslov <svan@elvis.ru>
X-MailScanner-ID: 28EFF1D2F07.A7DBD
X-MailScanner: Not scanned: please contact your Internet E-Mail Service Provider for details
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipsec/eidNXPIqxVPX8JI3-4pxdQqGeoI>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-intermediate-09: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2022 14:45:22 -0000

Hi,

On 2022-3-1, at 14:53, Valery Smyslov <svan@elvis.ru> wrote:
> 
> I can add the following text at the end of Section 1 (as new paragraph):
> 
>  Note, that the IKE_INTERMEDIATE exchange is not intended for
>  bulk transfer. This specification doesn't set a hard cap on
>  the amount of data that can be safely transferred using this mechanism,
>  as it depends on its application. But it is anticipated that in most cases
>  the amount of data will be limited to tens of Kbytes (few hundred Kbytes
>  in extreme cases).
> 
> Is it OK?

thanks, that looks very reasonable.

(If you wanted to, you could point at RFC6928 as an illustration that the IETF thought it OK for TCP to send up to ~15K in the first flight. There were also measurements done at the time that showed that at least some CDNs used even larger initial flight sizes.)

Thanks,
Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email