IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mif] Comments on draft-ietf-mif-mpvd-ndp-support

Steven Barth <cyrus@openwrt.org> Fri, 24 July 2015 05:00 UTC

Return-Path: <cyrus@openwrt.org>
X-Original-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77F3E1B2DD0 for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 22:00:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.55
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] autolearn=no
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 zHToN4N9hmHc for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 22:00:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.core-networks.de (mx1.core-networks.de [IPv6:2001:1bc0:d::4:8]) (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 DDD921A00B0 for <mif@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 22:00:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by mail.core-networks.de id 1ZIV5X-0000v2-S0 with ESMTPSA (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 07:00:03 +0200
To: Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
References: <55AF52F1.2040802@openwrt.org> <55B0CB0C.1010301@gmail.com> <55B0D2A8.4060807@openwrt.org> <55B0EFC1.4080502@gmail.com> <55B0F8A9.4060203@openwrt.org> <55B1034C.3010809@gmail.com>
From: Steven Barth <cyrus@openwrt.org>
Message-ID: <55B1C653.60507@openwrt.org>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 07:00:03 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <55B1034C.3010809@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mif/5BnDSmJJyCx6LnYJ1G9Vwh5JGeg>
Cc: "mif@ietf.org" <mif@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mif] Comments on draft-ietf-mif-mpvd-ndp-support
X-BeenThere: mif@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiple Interface Discussion List <mif.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mif/>
List-Post: <mailto:mif@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 05:00:08 -0000

>
> The text says "should the IPv6 packet be fragmented,.." which imho is rather clear it means IPv6 level fragmentation.

It is indeed, I feel rather that the intention for your MUST is not obvious.
To me I would either expect all fragmented ND packets to be dropped (esp. multicast), only some to be dropped but the packet to be discarded as a whole because of that, or the whole packet to be correctly reassembled. In all these cases I don't get the intention of your requirement.

Beside that I think this requirement is a layer violation here and would require a very good justification (aside trying to work-around some broken host implementations) since it significantly increases the implementation complexity of the RA server (at least in case your RAs are getting big).

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email