Re: [manet] Proposed text for Errata 6472 (and friends)

Henning Rogge <hrogge@gmail.com> Fri, 19 November 2021 08:45 UTC

Return-Path: <hrogge@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAD953A0C9C for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Nov 2021 00:45:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=gmail.com
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 7ErxA_o9bZUM for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Nov 2021 00:45:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf1-x130.google.com (mail-lf1-x130.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::130]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17D693A0C9A for <manet@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Nov 2021 00:45:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf1-x130.google.com with SMTP id l22so39806215lfg.7 for <manet@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Nov 2021 00:45:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=kpNdvxlxaXLYRc8BWOTuxdk3Vj7jc1Eim3Be775RwbE=; b=Pa0kuX/V34ha6E7wHq7vZbt3uTwwsz5tKzy1+0l2agz3tbPU7aYMS0GWK0ybs+ALlr uZ4Pt3Hd8WQAEDaiHhWvAsfS65y4uDhgM14fMi0IpQke3q96OCxuj9RKmCNgqYKax4yV +xwWxgGkF+juoVcBk0P2F5fyGG3obWX2VwFEdDFzfH2lHOyxSvW5FynVKHYoj7mp0S8j v091VtZ+rjXaBRg7LVHI/n390Y7llh04WGROkPBVcoaSfgF+0tZwsSldoo8gcaK4ZDbW aIsaXdqH361zDeJbnJp259UOYiBtIERkYK4FGHpN8g4CCoh+KFAPO50Q2gWMpimeY17z WFtg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=kpNdvxlxaXLYRc8BWOTuxdk3Vj7jc1Eim3Be775RwbE=; b=c0jD2DwPUmbKvTL/l0rZU0hxI1LZVohsttmVy2ZrSJFit10L0tx2zzUk3xChuHZKgg /FOd8+0C3kVyBY0/LC12cn+30ieksSzDVVH6wYAYLc8Ysy/XuEO4M43IItryi8PKI4QF HiaHE6dY+FqW8Bni8WzxDcr93DwQDuyn37psiXv1q8Zbmg/5dHq73DDK7pRLM0V012XW P2gwSFCmE5FVHcEAVK+aQ+Njb21FQxvKmy5psKriYxZllRK/zCT5lKmDqQiOWWs4cPxW VIt1CgDYQOPq2j2TQAEfmAIjlNE23GsKGwlI+BStolBAJYr0NsCB6AbYx6q7L//4VZus 02FQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5304xf1CXE+/j0LIAlHKkjYBlY7vJSDYKZt2Z0k8aH8rr0EP9LBs lEuQiry9VvNVVYp6pXR6K0PG/9Yq9unqyZqVQiJuK3p3NKE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwneMXOkY+2+5I7b/kD0HKSw8aa3rlMJA+MMJgHfbnbXgvhc3l+yEPXsHKcE7H9rYrpT4Gt0np8ZM46rV7VE+4=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:994a:: with SMTP id r10mr23548521ljj.301.1637311533303; Fri, 19 Nov 2021 00:45:33 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <38A5475DE83986499AEACD2CFAFC3F98020B1B9639@tss-server1.home.tropicalstormsoftware.com> <7a3901baf5da4bbeb23adee80a5be596@jhuapl.edu>
In-Reply-To: <7a3901baf5da4bbeb23adee80a5be596@jhuapl.edu>
From: Henning Rogge <hrogge@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 09:44:28 +0100
Message-ID: <CAGnRvurGXxcmbX_s5btwvvTvXnta50Zj=dzOBnM1TkuEW4RT8A@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Sipos, Brian J." <Brian.Sipos@jhuapl.edu>
Cc: Rick Taylor <rick@tropicalstormsoftware.com>, "manet@ietf.org" <manet@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/manet/L5whDmtjPsLskv2406S9y2ilnfc>
Subject: Re: [manet] Proposed text for Errata 6472 (and friends)
X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks <manet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/manet/>
List-Post: <mailto:manet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 08:45:42 -0000

You cannot do the receiver for the UDP discovery packets on an
ephemeral port anyways... wouldn't it be the usual thing just use the
same socket for sending the unicast reply?

Henning Rogge

On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 11:26 PM Sipos, Brian J. <Brian.Sipos@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
>
> Rick,
> For the first condition (connection point is present) there is still a lack of
> preference for UDP port number, which leaves things open. Can the source UDP
> port in that case be required (even a SHOULD would help) to be the same port
> number listened-for by the modem (i.e. the destination the port number of the
> Peer Discovery Signal)?
>
> In a typical case, I expect the modem would be listening on standard UDP port
> 854 so the Peer Offer would have a source port of 854. This makes things
> easier on traffic monitors so that it's not a UDP datagram from
> ephemeral-to-ephemeral port. It could also simplify implementation because the
> listening bound socket would also be usable for sending the response.
>
> Thanks,
> Brian S.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: manet <manet-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Rick Taylor
> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2021 11:36 AM
> To: manet@ietf.org
> Subject: [EXT] [manet] Proposed text for Errata 6472 (and friends)
>
> APL external email warning: Verify sender manet-bounces@ietf.org before
> clicking links or attachments
>
> Hi All,
>
> Here is my proposed text for the raised Errata.  Please review and comment, as
> there are particular combinations of if/MUST/else that can be confusing.
>
> ------
> Section 12.4, para 2.  Replace with:
>
> A Peer Offer Signal MUST be encoded within a UDP packet. The destination IP
> address and UDP port of the packet MUST be the source IP address and UDP port
> of the received Peer Discovery Signal packet.  If the modem includes IPv4 or
> IPv6 Connection Point Data Items in the Peer Offer Signal then the source IP
> address and UDP port of the packet may be any valid local UDP address/port
> combination.  If the Peer Offer Signal does not include IPv4 or IPv6
> Connection Point Data Items, then the source IP address and UDP port of the
> packet MUST be set to the unicast IP address and TCP port the router MUST use
> when connecting the DLEP TCP session, as defined in Section 7.1.  The Peer
> Offer Signal completes the discovery process.
> -----
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rick
>
> _______________________________________________
> manet mailing list
> manet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet
> _______________________________________________
> manet mailing list
> manet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet