Re: [Rtg-dt-encap-considerations] [nvo3] Alignment and Ethernet encapsulation

Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> Tue, 20 September 2016 17:29 UTC

Return-Path: <tom@herbertland.com>
X-Original-To: rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7D9212B0D8 for <rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 10:29:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 HD9oPo6U410f for <rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 10:29:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x236.google.com (mail-qk0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::236]) (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 E097512B106 for <rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 10:29:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-x236.google.com with SMTP id n185so22161365qke.1 for <rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 10:29:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=jzwOWSHl0Azl2Vt+2X4CClNMAP5WeFzaEBnGbK+SB9A=; b=usYozYvIxQJMkIJjfuv+zm7ym7Ri9PjWYBpgyoEKddIobcXjnqg9AKz7ALjpSUWnXf BbvuKUGtmvOcaaaDTML+IuRzwumsLLUTZc3WqD3Zaivxo1/LzMLk6DCI1RHK2KGSn9Mi X0EtzFqZgV5WhzJNpj6FLwoWr96I5bj0VjKK1Zcfvg2RGHRvp/zvQ+nEbA3DS6uBTqlb 4U2NGXcCLceIFFtLqHafgrNj/WGOpQ2XuBhhz0V2mLq+Vv2H478pIbO66YNnprqrLm+4 KFTalNNtvunWuJvYNz8Rq4uL4ZrHycLscJtR6UMeOrgvfFarDeboonyrZvZ5VIGN5Dn1 /yKw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=jzwOWSHl0Azl2Vt+2X4CClNMAP5WeFzaEBnGbK+SB9A=; b=iGiZaR2NDS8k0JcHJwUeAqR0GJoDyqMhaOhB8jISnUg3Vxx+w45pxI+9isbejO/BZz 5gm6lONMm/vt2q6Mpc6uHX7wcpZ3q+KZM/PiFN4W8/st7dcjamJguSNdJyZGZ5z5vi5/ nbEPANJWIx8Q+WK8W9Sc+vRG0P+B/qzF/lOIrmOdJrLZfiaaDzpZI8etJjQdUpJoxrnp qoUGJJT1bBPaLIglxDyahBylu8MG05rbFxEkc+SUvd6qnLyBwvF8huBXxXnABG+tI3qR 5+fkgJ5CF/LovRo2WAq4+luaF8uCCfvzJr9UPqu9wFBPZlTInxcAWqQGdvTh+okL/LnZ q4ZQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwOg9mwXjGPbE16hvgzdDOZlfKUyk6D1h/nlJGCV6T6FeCzb6hoVgNlyfBXYrXB8WTd3d7uo3tFcDOR0Ow==
X-Received: by 10.55.169.134 with SMTP id s128mr36120358qke.32.1474392549884; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 10:29:09 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.200.43.164 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 10:29:09 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <fcdcc884-2bf3-381d-8084-8bb845fb5ba8@isi.edu>
References: <CALx6S375-k7hEbC5YMsehWuCTczd=NzwCF8PdYew=vT_Ep+2-g@mail.gmail.com> <fcdcc884-2bf3-381d-8084-8bb845fb5ba8@isi.edu>
From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 10:29:09 -0700
Message-ID: <CALx6S36_YhTv7ddm9Op48OaQmz1MQ_2d31bjV7Cki1acNumBDw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dt-encap-considerations/QocKWCCpMB6ZS69RwWhf2tAa2xM>
Cc: Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@oracle.com>, "nvo3@ietf.org" <nvo3@ietf.org>, "rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietf.org" <rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Rtg-dt-encap-considerations] [nvo3] Alignment and Ethernet encapsulation
X-BeenThere: rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Design Team on Encapsulation Considerations discussion list <rtg-dt-encap-considerations.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-dt-encap-considerations>, <mailto:rtg-dt-encap-considerations-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtg-dt-encap-considerations/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-dt-encap-considerations-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-dt-encap-considerations>, <mailto:rtg-dt-encap-considerations-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 17:29:14 -0000

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> wrote:
> Hi, Tom,
>
>
> On 9/20/2016 9:13 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
>> ...
>> For new encapsulation protocols please consider the effects of IP
>> header alignment in the presence of Ethernet encapsulation. Defining
>> Ethernet encapsulation with the two byte padding like in ETHERIP may
>> help a lot to make implementation of Ethernet encapsulation feasible
>> on CPU HW.
>
> IMO, alignment needs to be handled within each encapsulation layer
> independently. I don't think it's useful to expect new encapsulation
> layers to have to make sure every layer of an encapsulated packet is
> aligned - just the first one ought to be sufficient. The rest is the
> responsibility of whomever added the other layers already in place.
>
> So yes, it's useful to make sure the encapsulated packet starts on a
> boundary that is 4-byte aligned, but the rest *needs to be* someone
> else's problem.
>
It's the Ethernet payload that we need to be four byte aligned not the
Ethernet header. Just aligning Ethernet header to four bytes is not
useful; that means the Ethernet payload, e.g. an IP packet, won't have
four byte alignment and hence the misery of trying to process the
packet. For the cost of two bytes ETHERIP gets things right in this
regard!

Tom


> Joe