Re: [lisp] Judging Consensus on the UDP Checksum Issue
Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net> Thu, 13 August 2009 22:13 UTC
Return-Path: <brian@innovationslab.net>
X-Original-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D05C028C178; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 15:13:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rDRBCNDPMzAK; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 15:13:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uillean.fuaim.com (uillean.fuaim.com [206.197.161.140]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F8463A67B8; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 15:13:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clairseach.fuaim.com (clairseach.fuaim.com [206.197.161.141]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by uillean.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B1AA8820F; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:54:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Clemson-2.local (c-69-255-98-109.hsd1.md.comcast.net [69.255.98.109]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clairseach.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA0D5130002; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:54:52 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4A847D96.1070606@innovationslab.net>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 16:54:46 -0400
From: Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: [lisp] Judging Consensus on the UDP Checksum Issue
References: <20090811161852.7157A6BE591@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <928251FD-05DA-4588-96C1-2135A33AF96C@sandstorm.net> <32AADADD-6A45-4565-91D5-F095AE713215@cisco.com> <CEFD62DC-4877-49C3-9294-87DEFAE326E0@nokia.com> <86D687BA-A9C9-4539-89FF-1FBD5E834C6A@cisco.com> <E5FEC413-6EA4-4A2D-A6A5-C97384D65AE8@nokia.com> <tslhbwbbo2q.fsf@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <tslhbwbbo2q.fsf@mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>, Noel Chiappa <jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>, Margaret Wasserman <mrw@sandstorm.net>, Dino Farinacci <dino@cisco.com>, "lisp@ietf.org" <lisp@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 13 Aug 2009 22:13:22 -0000
Sam Hartman wrote: >>>>>> "Lars" == Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com> writes: > > Lars> Hi, yes, because RFC2460 says "MUST use always" and the > Lars> intent here is to loosen that restriction for LISP and AMT. > > Lars> (And I'm sure Noel will again call this "red-tape legalese", > Lars> but the fact is that this change revises the standing IETF > Lars> consensus, and there's a process for that.) > > Something that apparently isn't obvious to some WG participants who > have contacted me off-list is that it is quite possible to change an > IETF consensus. When Margaret, Lars and I talk about doing things > like updating RFC 2460, we're not talking about what we think should > be a obstruction once we've done the work to decide what the right > technical direction is. > > We've all been on the IESG and are used to these sorts of updates as a > routine matter of IETF business. > > In the simplest case, you're talking about writing a potentially short > draft that updates the spec in question. You then find the > appropriate AD or working group to sponsor the draft and go through > the normal process. > > Yes, you do actually have to build consensus. For some updates, > that's easy, for others it is very difficult. That's how we all > convince each other that we actually have thought things through and > come to the right decision. Finally a point that is appropriate to the 6man mailing list... There are two proposals on the table to do just that (modify the handling of UDP as defined in 2460). The discussion should be on the tradeoffs of those two proposals. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-eubanks-chimento-6man-00 proposes allowing UDP to have a zero checksum in certain conditions (i.e., outer checksum is zero as long as there is an encapsulated UDP checksum that is valid). http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fairhurst-6man-tsvwg-udptt-01 proposes a "checksum per flow" approach that is applicable for UDP tunneled inside of UDP. The chairs of 6MAN would like to here feedback on these drafts as they apply to the problem spaces raised (AMT, v4/v6 translators, and LISP). Regards, Brian
- Re: [lisp] Judging Consensus on the UDP Checksum … Lars Eggert
- Re: [lisp] Judging Consensus on the UDP Checksum … Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] Judging Consensus on the UDP Checksum … Fred Baker
- RE: [lisp] Judging Consensus on the UDP Checksum … Darrel Lewis (darlewis)
- Re: [lisp] Judging Consensus on the UDP Checksum … Rémi Després
- Re: [lisp] Judging Consensus on the UDP Checksum … Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] Judging Consensus on the UDP Checksum … Fred Baker
- Re: [lisp] Judging Consensus on the UDP Checksum … Fred Baker
- Re: [lisp] Judging Consensus on the UDP Checksum … Lars Eggert
- Re: [lisp] Judging Consensus on the UDP Checksum … Rémi Després
- Re: [lisp] Judging Consensus on the UDP Checksum … Sam Hartman
- RE: [lisp] Judging Consensus on the UDP Checksum … Templin, Fred L
- Re: [lisp] Judging Consensus on the UDP Checksum … Dino Farinacci
- Re: [lisp] Judging Consensus on the UDP Checksum … Brian Haberman
- Re: [lisp] Judging Consensus on the UDP Checksum … Marshall Eubanks
- Re: [lisp] Judging Consensus on the UDP Checksum … Dino Farinacci