IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [internet-drafts@ietf.org: New Version Notification for draft-jones-6man-historic-rfc2675-00.txt]

Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com> Thu, 23 May 2019 05:48 UTC

Return-Path: <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7339120103 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 May 2019 22:48:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 HnXPaTorvvde for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 May 2019 22:48:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd2e.google.com (mail-io1-xd2e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2e]) (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 4BF02120096 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 May 2019 22:48:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd2e.google.com with SMTP id f22so3843859iol.11 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 May 2019 22:48:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=10KSsuEE5UutlANB7CfkIvrWv520RkAKYijiQXDBNzg=; b=oyIt+/bA9v9ahxbGQiBLdTUTGCl+i6VfkO18nPI4HXQ8kfvXq7UARKePzMbM+om/+s lH+XrMgIapMUGUvTmUb6AacF8+DfijorXIxiUMrJ6NSMxB2PD+ssflyH3oscilDF6eNw 7f/TEyIko3PuE3d5jkMUqOFA6im1Yckf+wtjpiOCBnMF7hZEw2u7gVZmyuPGIMcmkXsA fMEB49MFsjK8BWqIKAJH3J2ZAASUk1kyKBLSKArFDlUFwPydfN07tgsNpxseo4lo4+DI RWDvlMiu+oKUZ6QiHfuM0QNXW9joMHlSYsdCN2xDygkUVlGONoxuep5NkGckr3/JdRwC IlqQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=10KSsuEE5UutlANB7CfkIvrWv520RkAKYijiQXDBNzg=; b=YF72T/SKTPqbe2T67+fqDy0Qw9R3j60zdg6RjlOTCp+XXgHeUn6puD3JmiJA90XnSY ZcF82iwS/0V/xFvDfPyNPxSnPvuNKTzNcdjY4pqHt6PH58uOfIQw0A12VmaFEfhNCsbV D6BDMbqevG4vfuEI7VLxVW3OkDKPLjTkxs82s744igD2zSRlCumZ0zJIO5pOFbGtrvMH 8Ee5Qn8PYSdapcngnzEWLcZrMFV10M9AcwDGA4yUrcuEkeLgyuO7CNJQU6axWyUXUtBT XTmeaaoE0tiRrFrgf8vayXXtlJoaeFpcSqvNx20b+/eZ3fzLuhCgGh8O+h1FJkklSxDF 5JKQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUAoLQWm5OvfY4RS9Ru05Vt1BpDGXloumbU1V5RR4dVdfb/4Rp/ 39aqeWh7k0svsaa3qhJVpjxD9x112IAgvLXerKw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqynYOyNrgv9M9Fy23WBHtRrfXiGSEHJFhU07E0EbG3Oazw7wcI0cqBLBaEIIUIJAN0OzwAUtwR/BMgtftXAGWw=
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:80d1:: with SMTP id h17mr4739953ior.58.1558590496521; Wed, 22 May 2019 22:48:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190508125743.GA19360@tom-desk.erg.abdn.ac.uk> <19A018DE-280E-4400-95AC-7A3697ABE4B8@employees.org> <20190509062922.GA39281@profitmargin> <8e9b7085-78a7-4ad6-2e1b-73dcb1e0a15e@gmail.com> <6e3652d0-fed3-a672-16ad-ef3194dc13ed@dougbarton.us> <7280D1E3-8D42-48D7-8B99-F1D659123BD4@jisc.ac.uk> <BC60C287-2447-4007-8334-7AB569D88343@gmail.com> <192d82ab-57b0-dd20-4cb4-e198d31576a0@foobar.org> <7f020c5a-1ea6-8599-148f-1b6555454283@gmail.com> <CAAedzxrYtPwZw25iypTCjf_Uj6hj7qxRDABFP6QYSm+=dz4Aow@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAedzxrYtPwZw25iypTCjf_Uj6hj7qxRDABFP6QYSm+=dz4Aow@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 01:48:29 -0400
Message-ID: <CABNhwV3usakUGgmSFfwVG+kAZoz4BfDH6nBeaxDreoDFGJbwAA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [internet-drafts@ietf.org: New Version Notification for draft-jones-6man-historic-rfc2675-00.txt]
To: ek@loon.com
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>, "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e54331058987a02b"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/7psOl2v8kQFfLJVokMg1YCMfj1k>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 05:48:20 -0000

I agree with the draft making 2675 historic that we will never reach the
need to expand the payload length field from 16bit to 32 bit. We could
always revisit in the future but very doubtful it would ever happen.

Sorry my comment on usage of 65535 MTU was wrong.

I have deployed 9216 within the core and 9100 to the CE infrastructure
edges  giving 116 bytes of overhead for MPLS and Misc overhead bytes for
customer traffic to use 9100 Super Jumbo as necessary for apps requiring
high throughput.  We have never used any MTU beyond 9216 and to date I
don't think and Router or host OS vendor supports.

Gyan



On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 4:51 PM Erik Kline <ek@loon.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, 21 May 2019 at 13:47, Brian E Carpenter <
> brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 22-May-19 00:31, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>> > Gyan Mishra wrote on 20/05/2019 23:41:
>> >> now in the mpls core I have deployed many networks to date bumping
>> from
>> >> 9216 to 65535 for future super jumbo for customers and host OS and NIC
>> >> to eventually have enough memory bump mtu close to 65535 subtracting
>> out
>> >> mpls and misc overhead bytes.
>> >
>> > Not much networking kit supports MTU > 11k.
>>
>> Jumbograms were specifically designed on that assumption, hence the
>> restriction to interfaces capable of supporting >64K MTUs and the entirely
>> optional nature of the whole thing.
>>
>> Again, I don't see any reason to change the content or status of the RFC.
>>
>
> Agreed.
>


-- 
Gyan S. Mishra
IT Network Engineering & Technology Consultant
Routing & Switching / Service Provider MPLS & IPv6 Expert
www.linkedin.com/in/GYAN-MISHRA-RS-SP-MPLS-IPV6-EXPERT
Mobile – 202-734-1000

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email