IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Meta-issues: On the deprecation of the fragmentation function

"Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> Wed, 10 July 2013 14:59 UTC

Return-Path: <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.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 D325F21F9A81 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:59:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.526
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.526 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.073, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5gn0H1uN-kbo for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:59:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from blv-mbsout-02.boeing.com (blv-mbsout-02.boeing.com [130.76.32.232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04FB011E8132 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:58:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from blv-mbsout-02.boeing.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by blv-mbsout-02.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id r6AEwieS030101 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:58:45 -0700
Received: from XCH-NWHT-06.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-06.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.25.110]) by blv-mbsout-02.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id r6AEwiEf030094 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:58:44 -0700
Received: from XCH-BLV-405.nw.nos.boeing.com (130.247.25.158) by XCH-NWHT-06.nw.nos.boeing.com (130.247.25.110) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.297.1; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:58:45 -0700
Received: from XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.4.48]) by XCH-BLV-405.nw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.5.96]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.011; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:58:45 -0700
From: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
To: Ronald Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>, Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us>
Subject: RE: Meta-issues: On the deprecation of the fragmentation function
Thread-Topic: Meta-issues: On the deprecation of the fragmentation function
Thread-Index: AQHOfLVoEVtgyhVSFES4anVAs4ggI5lci/SAgAAN9ACAAAD+gIAACExQgAALN4CAAF6xUIAA834A
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 14:58:44 +0000
Message-ID: <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D983180B812F@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com>
References: <FAD482FE-4583-472A-8B57-E789A942686E@gmail.com> <1DF7BDE3-1490-41FE-A959-EC8EC54B0A5F@tzi.org> <8B84E185-36AC-4F22-A88E-5A2F1200AE8B@gmail.com> <51DC48F7.2080901@dougbarton.us> <2CF4CB03E2AA464BA0982EC92A02CE2509FA39E2@BL2PRD0512MB646.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <51DC5955.4030700@dougbarton.us> <2CF4CB03E2AA464BA0982EC92A02CE2509FB8317@BY2PRD0512MB653.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <2CF4CB03E2AA464BA0982EC92A02CE2509FB8317@BY2PRD0512MB653.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [130.247.104.6]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
Cc: "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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, 10 Jul 2013 14:59:24 -0000

Hi Ron,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Ronald Bonica
> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 5:33 PM
> To: Doug Barton
> Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Meta-issues: On the deprecation of the fragmentation
> function
> 
> Doug,
> 
> Let's see if we can find some common ground.
> 
> Assume that the IETF is considering a new protocol that doesn't run
> over TCP. In order to deal with MTU issues, the new protocol must do
> one of the following:
> 
> a) implement PLMTUD or PMTUD
> b) restrict itself to sending PDUs so small that when they are
> encapsulated in an IPv6 header, the resulting packet will not exceed
> 1280 bytes
> c) rely on IPv6 fragmentation
> 
> Is there ever a reason why c) is better than a) or b). For that matter,
> is c) ever an acceptable solution?

Fragmentation at a tunnel ingress router is unavoidable. Proof:

  - a tunnel configures a 1280 MTU
  - When its packets are encapsulated they emerge as (1280 + HLEN)
    (the length of the encapsulating headers)
  - the tunnel crosses a 1280 link somewhere in the path to the egress
  - the packet is dropped with a PTB signal sent back
  - the ingress now has two choices: 1) start fragmenting, 2) quit.

Thanks - Fred
fred.l.templin@boeing.com 

>                                                   Ron
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Doug Barton [mailto:dougb@dougbarton.us]
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 2:41 PM
> > To: Ronald Bonica
> > Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: Meta-issues: On the deprecation of the fragmentation
> > function
> >
> > On 07/09/2013 11:12 AM, Ronald Bonica wrote:
> > > Doug,
> > >
> > > It might be interesting to revisit what we mean by deprecating IPv6
> > fragmentation....
> > >
> > > It means that the IETF will not approve any new protocols that rely
> > upon IPv6 fragmentation. Nothing more, nothing less.
> >
> > Thanks for clarifying. FWIW, I understand what is being proposed, and
> I
> > still think it's a bad idea.
> >
> > Doug
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email