Re: Where we stand and where we are going
Erik Nordmark <Erik.Nordmark@sun.com> Thu, 04 July 2002 12:58 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-irnss-errors@lists.elistx.com>
Received: from ELIST-DAEMON.eListX.com by eListX.com (PMDF V6.0-025 #44856) id <0GYQ003046OVMS@eListX.com> (original mail from Erik.Nordmark@sun.com) ; Thu, 04 Jul 2002 08:58:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.eListX.com by eListX.com (PMDF V6.0-025 #44856) id <0GYQ003016OVMQ@eListX.com> for ietf-irnss@elist.lists.elistx.com (ORCPT ietf-irnss@lists.elistx.com); Thu, 04 Jul 2002 08:58:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from DIRECTORY-DAEMON.eListX.com by eListX.com (PMDF V6.0-025 #44856) id <0GYQ003016OVMO@eListX.com> for ietf-irnss@elist.lists.elistx.com (ORCPT ietf-irnss@lists.elistx.com); Thu, 04 Jul 2002 08:58:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from patan.sun.com (patan.Sun.COM [192.18.98.43]) by eListX.com (PMDF V6.0-025 #44856) with ESMTP id <0GYQ000IL6OURC@eListX.com> for ietf-irnss@lists.elistx.com; Thu, 04 Jul 2002 08:58:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from bebop.France.Sun.COM ([129.157.174.15]) by patan.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA16742; Thu, 04 Jul 2002 06:57:47 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from lillen (lillen [129.157.212.23]) by bebop.France.Sun.COM (8.11.6+Sun/8.10.2/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with SMTP id g64Cvkb25549; Thu, 04 Jul 2002 14:57:46 +0200 (MEST)
Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2002 14:56:19 +0200
From: Erik Nordmark <Erik.Nordmark@sun.com>
Subject: Re: Where we stand and where we are going
In-reply-to: Your message with ID <20020627091917.F24592@bailey.dscga.com>
To: Michael Mealling <michael@neonym.net>
Cc: Rob Austein <sra+irnss@hactrn.net>, ietf-irnss@lists.elistx.com
Reply-to: Erik Nordmark <Erik.Nordmark@sun.com>
Message-id: <Roam.SIMC.2.0.6.1025787379.22259.nordmark@bebop.france>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET="US-ASCII"
List-Owner: <mailto:ietf-irnss-help@lists.elistx.com>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-irnss@lists.elistx.com>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.elistx.com/ob/adm.pl>, <mailto:ietf-irnss-request@lists.elistx.com?body=subscribe>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.elistx.com/ob/adm.pl>, <mailto:ietf-irnss-request@lists.elistx.com?body=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.elistx.com/archives/ietf-irnss/>
List-Help: <http://lists.elistx.com/elists/admin.shtml>, <mailto:ietf-irnss-request@lists.elistx.com?body=help>
List-Id: <ietf-irnss.lists.elistx.com>
> I have had two instances where the usage profile of a protocol suggests > that 99% of the responses will be less than 2K and the interaction is > stateless and connection-less. Inheriting the full session semantics of TCP > isn't required. But neither is the sad state of UDP packet size limitations. Do we know enough about security (starting at what threats need to be considered etc) to have any idea what security would do to the packet sizes? > My proposed solution is to limit UDP packet sizes to 512 bytes and put > packet sequence numbers on them. You still have a connectionless interaction > but it a) puts the packet size into a realm with a higher probability of > success and b) allows for a handful of those packets to get through. I'm > not sure if you need more than that. You can still do the "well if > that didn't work I can always do TCP"... 512 for IPv4 might make sense, but IPv6 can handle more with its 1280 min MTU. In practise both can handle 1k well in today's network. If there was a way for the client to predict the size (assuming the problem is with large replies and not large requests) then life would be better than an error causing a TCP retry. Erik
- Re: Where we stand and where we are going Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine
- Re: Where we stand and where we are going Rob Austein
- Re: Where we stand and where we are going Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine
- RE: Where we stand and where we are going John C Klensin
- RE: Where we stand and where we are going Nicolas Popp
- Re: Where we stand and where we are going Patrik Fältström
- Re: Where we stand and where we are going Michael Mealling
- Re: Where we stand and where we are going Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine
- Re: Where we stand and where we are going Rob Austein
- Re: Where we stand and where we are going Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine
- Re: Where we stand and where we are going Leslie Daigle
- Re: Where we stand and where we are going John C Klensin
- Re: Where we stand and where we are going Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine
- Re: Where we stand and where we are going Michael Mealling
- Where we stand and where we are going John C Klensin
- Re: Where we stand and where we are going Erik Nordmark
- Re: Where we stand and where we are going bmanning