IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Thoughts on address selection

"Dan Wing" <dwing@cisco.com> Wed, 02 December 2009 17:32 UTC

Return-Path: <dwing@cisco.com>
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 9D2683A67F4 for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Dec 2009 09:32:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.099, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 NN98TpbnuRPl for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Dec 2009 09:32:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6F0F3A67D8 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Dec 2009 09:32:40 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-6.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.47,329,1257120000"; d="scan'208";a="444008726"
Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.223.137]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 02 Dec 2009 17:32:33 +0000
Received: from dwingwxp01 ([10.32.240.195]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nB2HWWE0015772; Wed, 2 Dec 2009 17:32:32 GMT
From: Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>
To: 'Rémi Denis-Courmont' <remi@remlab.net>
References: <F25A2D83-2504-4354-90BB-4CD2B0D3D743@cisco.com> <BB56240F3A190F469C52A57138047A030387A09C@xmb-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0911101724110.4034@mignon.ki.iif.hu> <4553CA36-9AF3-427C-BA03-1B9CDF487C32@cisco.com> <40B8A36C-A018-48DF-9D6A-E940E1A2E92B@nttv6.net><62B2E1A8-B367-43B6-9C1C-CFCD819950D0@cisco.com> <4B044080.4060604@venaas.com> <006f01ca7317$5cad8c40$c3f0200a@cisco.com> <8290370aafc02f020300afc1ef2de1cd@chewa.net>
Subject: RE: Thoughts on address selection
Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2009 09:32:32 -0800
Message-ID: <01b301ca7375$6e3a1ab0$c3f0200a@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350
In-Reply-To: <8290370aafc02f020300afc1ef2de1cd@chewa.net>
Thread-Index: AcpzOLSr308iuRPuR5yaUjrXz0JCeAAOzsdQ
Cc: draft-ietf-6man-addr-select-sol@tools.ietf.org, 'IETF IPv6 Mailing List' <ipv6@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-6man-addr-select-considerations@tools.ietf.org, 'Mohacsi Janos' <mohacsi@niif.hu>, 'Fred Baker' <fred@cisco.com>, draft-arifumi-6man-addr-select-conflict@tools.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: Wed, 02 Dec 2009 17:32:41 -0000

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rémi Denis-Courmont [mailto:remi@remlab.net] 
> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 2:18 AM
> To: Dan Wing
> Cc: Stig Venaas; Fred Baker; 
> draft-ietf-6man-addr-select-sol@tools.ietf.org; 
> draft-ietf-6man-addr-select-considerations@tools.ietf.org; 
> IETF IPv6 Mailing List; Mohacsi Janos; 
> draft-arifumi-6man-addr-select-conflict@tools.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Thoughts on address selection
> 
> 
> On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 22:19:10 -0800, "Dan Wing" <dwing@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> >> I'm a bit worried about this. If e.g. the host is 100ms 
> >> (RTT) away and
> >> 10 combinations work, you may end up creating TCP state 
> >> (and getting
> >> syn-acks back) on the destination host for 10 connections,
> 
> > Are there servers that don't use SYN-cookies now-a-days? 
> 
> IIRC, recent Linux kernel version have SYN-cookies disabled 
> by default as they were found to make things often worse 
> rather than better.

I found this citation regarding SYN cookies, which seems to
indicate further evolution of both minisock and SYN cookies
(to support WINSCALE and SACK) in Linux, 
http://lwn.net/Articles/277146/

-d

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email