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

Ronald Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net> Thu, 11 July 2013 13:50 UTC

Return-Path: <rbonica@juniper.net>
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 14AF511E8172 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 06:50:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.092
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.625, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, UNRESOLVED_TEMPLATE=3.132, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 Ju1HNmETefmX for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 06:50:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from co1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (co1ehsobe003.messaging.microsoft.com [216.32.180.186]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A14711E8175 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 06:50:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail147-co1-R.bigfish.com (10.243.78.241) by CO1EHSOBE003.bigfish.com (10.243.66.66) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.22; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:50:22 +0000
Received: from mail147-co1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail147-co1-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF0C79402FE for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:50:22 +0000 (UTC)
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:66.129.224.52; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); IPV:NLI; H:P-EMHUB02-HQ.jnpr.net; RD:none; EFVD:NLI
X-SpamScore: -25
X-BigFish: VPS-25(zz98dI9371I542I1432I1415Idb82hzz1f42h1ee6h1de0h1fdah2073h1202h1e76h1d1ah1d2ah1fc6hzz8275ch1033IL8275bh8275dhz2fh2a8h683h839h944hd25hf0ah1220h1288h12a5h12a9h12bdh137ah13b6h1441h1504h1537h153bh15d0h162dh1631h1758h18e1h1946h19b5h19ceh1ad9h1b0ah1d07h1d0ch1d2eh1d3fh1de9h1dfeh1dffh1e1dh1155h)
Received-SPF: pass (mail147-co1: domain of juniper.net designates 66.129.224.52 as permitted sender) client-ip=66.129.224.52; envelope-from=rbonica@juniper.net; helo=P-EMHUB02-HQ.jnpr.net ; -HQ.jnpr.net ;
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report-Untrusted: CIP:157.56.238.5; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); (null); H:BY2PRD0512HT002.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; R:internal; EFV:INT
Received: from mail147-co1 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail147-co1 (MessageSwitch) id 1373550620759136_30893; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:50:20 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from CO1EHSMHS023.bigfish.com (unknown [10.243.78.228]) by mail147-co1.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADBC0D8006C for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:50:20 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from P-EMHUB02-HQ.jnpr.net (66.129.224.52) by CO1EHSMHS023.bigfish.com (10.243.66.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.225.23; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:50:19 +0000
Received: from P-CLDFE01-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.59) by P-EMHUB02-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.36) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.213.0; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 06:50:18 -0700
Received: from o365mail.juniper.net (207.17.137.149) by o365mail.juniper.net (172.24.192.59) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.355.2; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 06:50:18 -0700
Received: from co1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (216.32.180.186) by o365mail.juniper.net (207.17.137.149) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.355.2; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 06:53:58 -0700
Received: from mail12-co1-R.bigfish.com (10.243.78.244) by CO1EHSOBE007.bigfish.com (10.243.66.70) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.22; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:50:17 +0000
Received: from mail12-co1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail12-co1-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86490401D3 for <ipv6@ietf.org.FOPE.CONNECTOR.OVERRIDE>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:50:17 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail12-co1 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail12-co1 (MessageSwitch) id 1373550615444199_14276; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:50:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from CO1EHSMHS017.bigfish.com (unknown [10.243.78.240]) by mail12-co1.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 668998015B; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:50:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from BY2PRD0512HT002.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (157.56.238.5) by CO1EHSMHS017.bigfish.com (10.243.66.27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.225.23; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:50:11 +0000
Received: from BY2PRD0512MB653.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([169.254.5.145]) by BY2PRD0512HT002.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.255.243.35]) with mapi id 14.16.0329.000; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:50:08 +0000
From: Ronald Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>
To: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>, james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com>, "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Meta-issues: On the deprecation of the fragmentation function
Thread-Topic: Meta-issues: On the deprecation of the fragmentation function
Thread-Index: AQHOfLVoLtuD7p8LeE2Fhu/K5qJEnJlci/SAgAAN9ACAAAD+gIAACExQgAALN4CAAF6xUIAA9WwAgAALYhCAAC2kgIAAD8OAgAAKNQCAADgwEA==
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:50:07 +0000
Message-ID: <2CF4CB03E2AA464BA0982EC92A02CE2509FBC675@BY2PRD0512MB653.namprd05.prod.outlook.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> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D983180B812F@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> <2CF4CB03E2AA464BA0982EC92A02CE2509FBAB7B@BY2PRD0512MB653.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <B5A72885-678A-442A-86D7-D710D2324A28@apple.com> <2CF4CB03E2AA464BA0982EC92A02CE2509FBBF5E@BY2PRD0512MB653.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D983180B8722@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com>
In-Reply-To: <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D983180B8722@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [66.129.232.2]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%0$Dn%*$RO%0$TLS%0$FQDN%$TlsDn%
X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%12219$Dn%BOEING.COM$RO%2$TLS%5$FQDN%onpremiseedge-1018244.customer.frontbridge.com$TlsDn%o365mail.juniper.net
X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%12219$Dn%APPLE.COM$RO%2$TLS%5$FQDN%onpremiseedge-1018244.customer.frontbridge.com$TlsDn%o365mail.juniper.net
X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%12219$Dn%IETF.ORG$RO%2$TLS%5$FQDN%onpremiseedge-1018244.customer.frontbridge.com$TlsDn%o365mail.juniper.net
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
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: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:50:29 -0000

Yes, I am talking about IPv6 fragmentation.

                     Ron

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Templin, Fred L [mailto:Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 3:56 PM
> To: Ronald Bonica; james woodyatt; ipv6@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Meta-issues: On the deprecation of the fragmentation
> function
> 
> Hi Ron,
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> > Of Ronald Bonica
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 12:22 PM
> > To: james woodyatt; ipv6@ietf.org
> > Subject: RE: Meta-issues: On the deprecation of the fragmentation
> > function
> >
> > Hi James,
> >
> > If ICMPv6 PTB messages are unreliable, fragmentation breaks just as
> > badly as PMTUD.
> 
> I'm trying to understand that, but maybe you are talking about IP
> fragmentation? SEAL fragmentation is a different thing, and can be used
> in place of IP fragmentation.
> 
> Thanks - Fred
> fred.l.templin@boeing.com
> 
> > At the risk of going off-topic, please take a look at draft-bonica-
> > intarea-gre-mtu-02.
> >
> >                                                  Ron
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On
> Behalf
> > Of
> > > james woodyatt
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 2:23 PM
> > > To: ipv6@ietf.org
> > > Subject: Re: Meta-issues: On the deprecation of the fragmentation
> > > function
> > >
> > > On Jul 10, 2013, at 08:49 , Ronald Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>
> > wrote:
> > > > [...]
> > > > Probably, the best alternative is for the tunnel ingress router
> to
> > > tunnel ingress router to discover the PMTU to the egress. When the
> > > tunnel ingress router receives a packet that is so large that it
> > cannot
> > > be forwarded through the tunnel, it discards the packet and sends
> an
> > > ICMP PTB to the packet's originator. The packet's originator then
> > > modifies its sending behavior based upon its new estimate of the
> > > PMTU associated with the destination.
> > > > [...]
> > >
> > > ICMPv6 packet too big errors are unreliable on the real-world
> > Internet.
> > >
> > > I hate to sound like a broken record, but I will: I look forward to
> > > reviewing a proposal to update to Generic Packet Tunneling in IPv6
> > [RFC
> > > 2473] for implementing tunnel path MTU discovery at the
> > > encapsulation layer [c.f. RFC 4821].
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com>
> > > core os networking
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative
> > > Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> > ipv6@ietf.org
> > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
>