IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-in-udp-04.txt> (Encapsulating MPLS in UDP) to Proposed Standard

"Eggert, Lars" <lars@netapp.com> Tue, 21 January 2014 12:31 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@netapp.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D3EB1A00C9 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 04:31:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.437
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 YN8YIzOP56Gs for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 04:31:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx12.netapp.com (mx12.netapp.com [216.240.18.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1C881A00BD for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 04:31:35 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.95,696,1384329600"; d="asc'?scan'208"; a="138153533"
Received: from vmwexceht06-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.77.104]) by mx12-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 21 Jan 2014 04:31:35 -0800
Received: from SACEXCMBX06-PRD.hq.netapp.com ([169.254.9.60]) by vmwexceht06-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.77.104]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 04:31:35 -0800
From: "Eggert, Lars" <lars@netapp.com>
To: Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-in-udp-04.txt> (Encapsulating MPLS in UDP) to Proposed Standard
Thread-Index: AQHPFjGjZzPPQlRcgk6ua2U45NfiYJqOw4KAgADURICAAAStgIAABf8AgAAAtwA=
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 12:31:34 +0000
Message-ID: <D141DD92-A87B-464A-BF63-84FF9E3D15BC@netapp.com>
References: Your message of "Fri, 17 Jan 2014 23:00:33 +0000." <290E20B455C66743BE178C5C84F1240847E63346D1@EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk>, <201401202247.s0KMllSl047284@maildrop2.v6ds.occnc.com> <290E20B455C66743BE178C5C84F1240847E63346D6@EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk> <52DE5F19.1060907@cisco.com> <558A15A9-204A-4447-923C-58DC2A3CED8A@netapp.com> <52DE680C.30704@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <52DE680C.30704@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.106.53.51]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_784D3809-7870-4E96-A1CA-722F73BAD5BB"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-in-udp-04.txt> (Encapsulating MPLS in UDP) to Proposed Standard
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 12:31:37 -0000

On 2014-1-21, at 13:29, Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com> wrote:
> So we have established that it's not the load on the NATs and Firewalls we are worried about.
> 
> Seemingly from the above congestion is off the table as well.
> 
> Now surely those same NATs and firewalls will be looking for an SA, DA, Type, SP, DP match
> and that is a lot of things that have to be right for a header corruption misdelivery to get
> through.

Of course it's not the load.

It's that if someone encapsulates congestion-unresponsive traffic in UDP, it can go places where it can't go when it is encapsulated in IP. So the potential harm is greater if the encapsulator doesn't implement congestion control or a circuit breaker.

Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email