RE: "Deprecate"

"Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> Fri, 02 August 2013 15:04 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 78A9711E80FA for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 08:04:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.382
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.382 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.217, 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 e0rWwLeUKt3S for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 08:04:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from slb-mbsout-02.boeing.com (slb-mbsout-02.boeing.com [130.76.64.129]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F29011E80E7 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 08:04:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from slb-mbsout-02.boeing.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by slb-mbsout-02.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id r72F4r1o027852 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 08:04:53 -0700
Received: from XCH-NWHT-11.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-11.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.25.114]) by slb-mbsout-02.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id r72F4rsX027847 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Fri, 2 Aug 2013 08:04:53 -0700
Received: from XCH-BLV-404.nw.nos.boeing.com (130.247.25.157) by XCH-NWHT-11.nw.nos.boeing.com (130.247.25.114) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.297.1; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 08:04:53 -0700
Received: from XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.4.29]) by XCH-BLV-404.nw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.4.38]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.011; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 08:04:52 -0700
From: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
To: RJ Atkinson <rja.lists@gmail.com>, "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: "Deprecate"
Thread-Topic: "Deprecate"
Thread-Index: AQHOj3igiYfnka6nOUeBop7mpmo4ZpmCA2zQ
Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 15:04:52 +0000
Message-ID: <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D983180DD8F5@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> <51DC77B1.9020206@gmail.com> <DEDA9E45-2839-4D7C-9D86-04360DDE9C1D@gmail.com> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D983180DCA04@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> <F47D3B2D-A883-4F24-9263-95F85F59E20A@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <F47D3B2D-A883-4F24-9263-95F85F59E20A@gmail.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
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: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 15:04:59 -0000

Hi Ran,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> RJ Atkinson
> Sent: Friday, August 02, 2013 5:06 AM
> To: ipv6@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: "Deprecate"
> 
> 
> On 01  Aug 2013, at 18:40 , Templin, Fred L wrote:
> >> If the physical MTU is 1280, then the tunnel MTU will be smaller.
> >
> > Not allowed; the tunnel MUST be able to do a minimum 1280.
> 
> A number of nested tunnel deployments that I'm aware of
> simply do not support that 1280 MTU inside the innermost
> tunnel -- because of accumulated tunnel encapsulation
> overhead.

If you mean an innermost IPv4 tunnel, I have certainly seen that
with IPv4 GRE within IPsec. If you mean an innermost IPv6 tunnel,
that is broken as far as the specs are concerned. The innermost
tunnel is not allowed to send a PTB reporting an MTU size smaller
than 1280.

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

> Those nested tunnel deployments are just as real as the PMTUD
> operational issues.  Each is applicable to some environments,
> but not necessarily to all paths and all deployments.
> 
> If this document is to be reality-based, we need to acknowledge
> all of the operational realities that have an impact on this topic,
> not just acknowledge some of the operational realities.
> 
> Yours,
> 
> Ran
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------