IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Softwires] [Int-area] [nvo3] Is it feasible to perform fragmentation on UDP encapsulated packets.

"Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> Thu, 02 June 2016 21:17 UTC

Return-Path: <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
X-Original-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E87C212D8AA; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 14:17:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.647
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.647 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 LbeKeLPLCmaK; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 14:17:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from blv-mbsout-01.boeing.com (blv-mbsout-01.boeing.com [130.76.32.231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A6DD12D8A2; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 14:17:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-mbsout-01.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id u52LHBJa011253; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 14:17:11 -0700
Received: from XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com [137.137.100.80]) by blv-mbsout-01.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id u52LH6TG011226 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 2 Jun 2016 14:17:06 -0700
Received: from XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com (2002:8989:6450::8989:6450) by XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com (2002:8989:6450::8989:6450) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 14:16:53 -0700
Received: from XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com ([137.137.100.80]) by XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com ([137.137.100.80]) with mapi id 15.00.1178.000; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 14:16:53 -0700
From: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
To: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>, "otroan@employees.org" <otroan@employees.org>, Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com>
Thread-Topic: [Int-area] [nvo3] [Softwires] Is it feasible to perform fragmentation on UDP encapsulated packets.
Thread-Index: AQHRvPnkfjHsPaf//UOpMMLUhxA5mJ/Wra5A
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 21:16:53 +0000
Message-ID: <d8b48fc193e644fe91c4e3db10eed3ed@XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com>
References: <E83B905A-FF6D-4996-B71A-7921DE4B133B@ericsson.com> <BFC09F5C-D6DF-4B6B-AA95-03919B9F09FB@cisco.com> <573E2A0E.1060609@isi.edu> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0D54EB60@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com> <573F453C.5060908@isi.edu> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0D554B73@NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com> <5743303C.5040109@isi.edu> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0D55514C@NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com> <5743DD16.3050506@isi.edu> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0D555482@NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com> <57448C14.2060203@isi.edu> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0D5557DE@NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com> <9c462520-eb8e-fcd0-0a08-228f80fbc779@isi.edu> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0D5596E0@NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com> <8790AF6F-CCD6-43AC-A50E-957B037643F1@employees.org> <57507611.5010801@isi.edu>
In-Reply-To: <57507611.5010801@isi.edu>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [137.137.12.6]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/softwires/oRTFfsLf5Imq4nCAsYuytMhw670>
Cc: Softwires WG <softwires@ietf.org>, "nvo3@ietf.org" <nvo3@ietf.org>, "int-area@ietf.org" <int-area@ietf.org>, "lisp@ietf.org" <lisp@ietf.org>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Softwires] [Int-area] [nvo3] Is it feasible to perform fragmentation on UDP encapsulated packets.
X-BeenThere: softwires@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: softwires wg discussion list <softwires.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/softwires/>
List-Post: <mailto:softwires@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 21:17:03 -0000

Agree with Joe, and also just to mention that RFC4459 discusses tunnel MTU
and fragmentation considerations.

Thanks - Fred

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Int-area [mailto:int-area-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Joe Touch
> Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 11:08 AM
> To: otroan@employees.org; Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com>
> Cc: Softwires WG <softwires@ietf.org>; nvo3@ietf.org; int-area@ietf.org; lisp@ietf.org; tsvwg@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Int-area] [nvo3] [Softwires] Is it feasible to perform fragmentation on UDP encapsulated packets.
> 
> 
> 
> On 5/27/2016 3:50 AM, otroan@employees.org wrote:
> > It is not possible to implement reassembly complying with IETF RFCs.
> 
> a) ATM does this at ridiculously high fragment rates. Granted IP frags
> can come out of order, but the fragments are generally much larger.
> 
> b) What is the alternative, given we have minimum MTU requirements?
> 
> If you're limiting yourself to IPv4 payloads where DF=0, sure, there
> there is an alternative. But you've just disabled IPv6 and IPv4 with DF=1.
> 
> I.e., it's not possible to NOT implement this and comply with IETF RFCs.
> 
> Joe
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> Int-area@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email