IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Updated ICMP PMTU section (#1412)

Igor Lubashev <notifications@github.com> Mon, 18 June 2018 18:54 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@github.com>
X-Original-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD414130EFE for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:54:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.01
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.01 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, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=github.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 F04Q0O4G0JFb for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:53:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-2.smtp.github.com (out-2.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 721E2130F79 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:53:58 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:53:57 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1529348037; bh=BwKw75eahspwecFgOWn4TWBY+i+AmGsE6+LRjnOleog=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=xWNxxmyH4bHsxUuPP8XpwBJUUMIi0wZxndcEqPr77kbwaC5uedtJyRNeDaPaEMT1D yLWpiwFi1QFSnWAaxiYAtMBlcLYO+X5b1wyJayvAK7lv2cy5gAtrB4KnpaWSi8tNoA b+N3VIqdo4JxQw7H+0vr/TRdoRwXz8z8qwDWpsVY=
From: Igor Lubashev <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abfb8488d83ac850fba8e7c81962b4f9727feb68c792cf00000001173fc1c592a169ce13a079ba@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1412/review/129693065@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1412@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1412@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Updated ICMP PMTU section (#1412)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5b27ffc590f08_2b3d3fbd4257cf80100064"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: igorlord
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/XlcJUKInZs6eTQyndXpps4tND0M>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <quic-issues.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic-issues/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic-issues@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 18:54:10 -0000

igorlord commented on this pull request.



> @@ -3157,9 +3157,9 @@ header, protected payload, and any authentication fields.
 All QUIC packets SHOULD be sized to fit within the estimated PMTU to avoid IP
 fragmentation or packet drops. To optimize bandwidth efficiency, endpoints
 SHOULD use Packetization Layer PMTU Discovery ({{!PLPMTUD=RFC4821}}).  Endpoints
-MAY use PMTU Discovery ({{!PMTUDv4=RFC1191}}, {{!PMTUDv6=RFC8201}}) for
-detecting the PMTU, setting the PMTU appropriately, and storing the result of
-previous PMTU determinations.
+MAY use classical PMTU Discovery ({{!PMTUDv4=RFC1191}}, {{!PMTUDv6=RFC8201}})

How strongly do you feel against word "classical"?  It is used in other RFCs for the purpose I am using it here.  See https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4821 and https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5320.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1412#discussion_r196187281

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email