Re: [Spud] updated draft PLUS charter, rev. 1 June

Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 07 June 2016 22:19 UTC

Return-Path: <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: spud@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spud@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DE4A12D8A6 for <spud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jun 2016 15:19:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 AT17HcZq1fBz for <spud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jun 2016 15:19:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x230.google.com (mail-oi0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::230]) (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 935B212D89C for <spud@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Jun 2016 15:19:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi0-x230.google.com with SMTP id k23so300005766oih.0 for <spud@ietf.org>; Tue, 07 Jun 2016 15:19:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=F6DPWXZZwxayrGm7kATM5VNDeyXmWK2BFlFkr9zRkUI=; b=wXdaTJ7hCnIyAkGAkbRJnCJGvBe0e8+46BG1XBGJXhnB1UpyXbXj7Ll5E/H6sQ9QUx iiLk4Dd6FeZAcRo3Q3KbiZ6fka+Fpj7zOES1FrKGJgOjgCcAOYm7JcGt15X74isXKngD nfpuo3Uv2BpKojGOsO62OsrX5m8dzbZpHUsnY9KZ2wvcrExBpMfcjSwktHwTw1BSd7dD 6lLZjErTM63BRaWJPzxIco507vzpB6RW1p57aY0l63dphN81nikF0jTBEk1ebe34JAUH kL3ngWHYCDvy9TUTFOl1g/BZF23BSaLdoYBjj0IKNzrf9KJV1CIgLfMuCIj1vLp2NVyx g/jg==
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=F6DPWXZZwxayrGm7kATM5VNDeyXmWK2BFlFkr9zRkUI=; b=l8VsVaPVEmVZ2A+pdRtW01DQj/16P4IaeI7RwHNUR3x+Ibgf+51Soi5mxYEngAiIlN sHbwC9FxaUOPWxmlDLz8+9AIcP1ggn8iQOp8YptoXNEaQj69sdf4uiYP/eqQFzxs63Hg h2UPCk/Vvxa/m1Bge6/TO0CxMKbaqfRUgLcifxPX5BnTJOQMSaB9lKGLavtUXt5OVdqV dHHBVeIbvhYEEY85WWZ6r3umtdQHq25ZmT+V+HdOJ5scbBUw9hio8RSdYYu0iNX4wx13 LEoMYBcunnyFbneVhG3g6EQdudVdBacaBaVWX6CKSbH9/yRLL+tLimO6djFo0s2MCWcA RHKQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tKRsuLDakMZmylNtMTMt8ESXnDhBAnNBVDuexI2uAYEV5SoAAnZC92Wj+UALdSiwiSnon99nUx7QyDyGg==
X-Received: by 10.202.171.143 with SMTP id u137mr970636oie.71.1465337942874; Tue, 07 Jun 2016 15:19:02 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.202.171.146 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Jun 2016 15:18:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <c1f26653-a5fa-9605-4c43-6ae96de80dbf@isi.edu>
References: <85E24D9D-F666-49C3-A022-2F207227A153@trammell.ch> <CAD62q9UiLi1ffGPm=xEXOSH=sqZPv7hYiNBTGvAX52a9dhV8yg@mail.gmail.com> <CAD62q9U7XL8hDqY1VdzuvUvoz0Ec5DDLAS6=kaLxRExu7FY0Kg@mail.gmail.com> <86027402-2F05-4E3B-B9CD-26517A4F007C@tik.ee.ethz.ch> <A4C63A75-9D7E-430E-B986-9981FB929D46@gmail.com> <CA+9kkMBhJ2oCJ1avnGUY4NYTX0VWA_g=YoJSiLcy6u9hJnH-eA@mail.gmail.com> <57573DCF.1030402@isi.edu> <F6BE4EE1-D320-421E-9D86-2F30B2A88792@tik.ee.ethz.ch> <c1f26653-a5fa-9605-4c43-6ae96de80dbf@isi.edu>
From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2016 15:18:43 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+9kkMAvtsEpJtjPU2j+R+7g3TsbKKp-LiLB4BKkF+2SJ+v8_g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113c2efe8fa18a0534b793ad"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spud/DpuAA3dloPb5nQfhoLge4RZUzfU>
Cc: Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com>, Brian Trammell <ietf@trammell.ch>, Mirja Kühlewind <mirja.kuehlewind@tik.ee.ethz.ch>, spud <spud@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Spud] updated draft PLUS charter, rev. 1 June
X-BeenThere: spud@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Protocol Underneath Datagrams <spud.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spud>, <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spud/>
List-Post: <mailto:spud@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spud>, <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2016 22:19:05 -0000

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> wrote:


> The UDP option field is a vehicle in which an architecture could send
> info back in-band without affecting the UDP stream.
>
> It's not the only solution and won't work for other transports, but if
> you want ICMP-like feedback in-band for UDP, it will work and is as
> architecturally clean as any other new/shim layer would be.
>
>
So the problem with talking about any single requirement is that it looks a
good bit easier to match the capabilities required  than it turns out to
be.  If you go back to Section 5 of  draft-trammell-spud-req-04, you'll see
why the tube-id is useful (and necessary to avoid packet injection
attacks).  Unfortunately, the space available in this option field isn't
really sufficient for a reasonable tube-id plus the ICMP (or other
signalling) desired.

Just my view of the requirements, of course; I certainly see that folks
have different views of this.

regards,

Ted

Joe
>
>