[L2tpext] ECN over IP-shim-(L2)-IP Tunnels: New draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc6040update-shim-03

Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net> Tue, 27 June 2017 12:00 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>
X-Original-To: l2tpext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: l2tpext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6555129AD1; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 05:00:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bobbriscoe.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X3sn1z_sjLH9; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 05:00:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server.dnsblock1.com (server.dnsblock1.com [85.13.236.178]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DE5E129ABE; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 05:00:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bobbriscoe.net; s=default; h=Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:Cc:To:References:Subject:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=xEA3WGcZJ4DY7w+iccN9PQ7hDQNw6Tv/8nOsJeeDve4=; b=v1f995+2Nj3yxEa2m9Fo1TQ5z WsC1m3+Fe9t/oJg5KsIR9BSDLI8+qabOsUK7oNtKtBAYVcE0FtKnBzGMU0xkCPQY5a3WsXWuwUPcX KZaMCKe1A2xZOlVBQSNv3c08GpaGd9cUwCnmLS9X1Cw8Mg3iwWZl5+H/QiE3JXE/OdNQXctgvkYg/ cTrp8+ThxTURhE7wyJrPL0acfcn2hB7oqkr4Yqmn16GejOimWXErwAtr5sl+LQIg2EhcItU1JOO5m 67JNpYx16SEt9CCbLxF88+OJNfrbjLe3j7yXN4SsqXlyF3BdB6A7fUtwpwyKBBcTlxVbrPduDAlGb GcW694M5w==;
Received: from [31.185.128.124] (port=52714 helo=[192.168.0.6]) by server.dnsblock1.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>) id 1dPpA3-0002YR-Bm; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 13:00:03 +0100
References: <149856203820.14897.6223506257752075989.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: "Black, David" <david.black@emc.com>, "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <cpignata@cisco.com>, Ignacio Goyret <ignacio.goyret@nokia.com>, Alia ATLAS <akatlas@gmail.com>, Praveen Balasubramanian <pravb@microsoft.com>, Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>, "nvo3@ietf.org" <nvo3@ietf.org>, Christian Huitema <huitema@microsoft.com>
Cc: tsvwg IETF list <tsvwg@ietf.org>, intarea IETF list <int-area@ietf.org>, l2tp IETF list <l2tpext@ietf.org>, "opsawg-chairs@ietf.org" <opsawg-chairs@ietf.org>, Service Function Chaining IETF list <sfc@ietf.org>
From: Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>
X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <149856203820.14897.6223506257752075989.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Message-ID: <291369ad-5f3a-e529-c2ef-24dfe2406b2f@bobbriscoe.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 13:00:01 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <149856203820.14897.6223506257752075989.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------6A1261D435D710497D63773F"
Content-Language: en-GB
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server.dnsblock1.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - bobbriscoe.net
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server.dnsblock1.com: authenticated_id: in@bobbriscoe.net
X-Authenticated-Sender: server.dnsblock1.com: in@bobbriscoe.net
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/l2tpext/jK6ddpxK_vFiJu6lzpAj0PwqPmA>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 08:24:44 -0700
Subject: [L2tpext] ECN over IP-shim-(L2)-IP Tunnels: New draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc6040update-shim-03
X-BeenThere: l2tpext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Layer Two Tunneling Protocol Extensions <l2tpext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/l2tpext>, <mailto:l2tpext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/l2tpext/>
List-Post: <mailto:l2tpext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:l2tpext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2tpext>, <mailto:l2tpext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 12:00:10 -0000

David (as doc shepherd),

This is the 3rd revision in the last 2 months. This revision attempts to 
capture all the comments collected thanks to Carlos, Ignacio, Praveen, 
Joe and Alia. It would be useful to have a confirmation from each of you 
that I have addressed your concerns (or not).

I have cross-posted all the lists potentially affected by this draft 
(intended proposed standard).
If you reply concerning a specific point, pls trim the distribution only 
to those interested/relevant.

* tsvwg: owns updates to ECN
* int-area: owns mtce of many tunnelling protocols, particularly GRE?, 
Teredo? GUE
* l2tpext: owns mtce of L2TP
* opsawg: owns mtce of CAPWAP
* nvo3: currently defining Geneve, VXLAN-GPE
* sfc: currently defining NSH

 From my point of view, this draft is now 'finished'. I.e. I am happy 
with it, and it is the first draft where all the ToDo's are done. I 
believe it is on track for the milestone of WGLC before the Nov'17 IETF. 
As I understand it, WGLC will run in tsvwg and in parallel in int-area, 
l2tpext and perhaps opsawg.

Main changes since -02:
* Completely restructured, with definitions of scope before even 
mentioning "tightly coupled shim headers", and new subsections where 
existing text on feasibility and desirability has been re-homed.
* Explanation of the safety problem, and the procedural problem this 
caused when previous ECN RFCs were written (an RFC cannot 
retrospectively set requirements on implementations, so we can only set 
operational requirements - configuration).
* Added NSH, but it doesn't seem to cover encapsulation.
* No longer categorized VXLAN-GPE as intended for standards track
* Added Teredo update text (for safety).

Cheers


Bob

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	New Version Notification for 
draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc6040update-shim-03.txt
Date: 	Tue, 27 Jun 2017 04:13:58 -0700
From: 	internet-drafts@ietf.org
To: 	Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>;



A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc6040update-shim-03.txt
has been successfully submitted by Bob Briscoe and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:		draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc6040update-shim
Revision:	03
Title:		Propagating Explicit Congestion Notification Across IP Tunnel Headers Separated by a Shim
Document date:	2017-06-27
Group:		tsvwg
Pages:		16
URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc6040update-shim-03.txt
Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc6040update-shim/
Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc6040update-shim-03
Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc6040update-shim-03
Diff:           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc6040update-shim-03

Abstract:
    RFC 6040 on "Tunnelling of Explicit Congestion Notification" made the
    rules for propagation of ECN consistent for all forms of IP in IP
    tunnel.  This specification updates RFC 6040 to clarify that its
    scope includes tunnels where two IP headers are separated by at least
    one shim header that is not sufficient on its own for wide area
    packet forwarding.  It surveys widely deployed IP tunnelling
    protocols separated by such shim header(s) and updates the
    specifications of those that do not mention ECN propagation (L2TPv2,
    L2TPv3, GRE and Teredo).  This specification also updates RFC 6040
    with configuration requirements needed to make any legacy tunnel
    ingress safe.

                                                                                   


Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat