Re: [Stackevo-discuss] [tsvwg] [Stackevo] draft-byrne-opsec-udp-advisory

Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> Fri, 24 July 2015 17:44 UTC

Return-Path: <dave.taht@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: stackevo-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: stackevo-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB3C41A7D81 for <stackevo-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 10:44:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable
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 dgqEIxdUs35g for <stackevo-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 10:43:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ob0-x230.google.com (mail-ob0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::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 269041A7025 for <stackevo-discuss@iab.org>; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 10:43:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by obre1 with SMTP id e1so20517849obr.1 for <stackevo-discuss@iab.org>; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 10:43:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/dbhSpbH1F9bShBe6S2LVoliG3jbqpzevdTM53X/gqM=; b=RxW3GcBAw94tNYElgUK/QAP3FVZseoz0zQhqB6AXSXVfuFzK8uekqxQk22UUUrtuzc 4JJD0FZCj4o+Nx6uA/0ISnjExX0UpMVt7dno/97VnhqgYRjMA3eY9zAsd38c+mxnreQM H+URv6sTfNal2vz1xRKSryMPw46Tc8uAxeJuhFvkH5JVWl77JFz9VaXVpU0k3goW2iSb NGGQey6PpflGvt3IJ//WxgiglHD/qLRp0lqPsmCqiQWm8sL8ujso5ONZ8fT0C1RB3lTp 1UJqeTwgSfuxyjJO7B8K9xZ/Tg03VJ/1mI4bvfvMIoiczShkiF6kx6G3lHhnKdXL1/Gw osUg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.246.136 with SMTP id xw8mr16977057obc.29.1437759838589; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 10:43:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.202.107.9 with HTTP; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 10:43:58 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <55B2723C.4090203@isi.edu>
References: <CAD6AjGRA0-z6H9b2UEBSoOmkdmcVuCkfxhfaOuzZ2jgwLm+fZA@mail.gmail.com> <55AEED07.9080804@isi.edu> <CAD6AjGSgnSBo_RxMoecvMTvWGMQhv1CGu6Pc0gAes0zOBRB1Gg@mail.gmail.com> <EA4C43BE752A194597B002779DF69BAE23DB842D@ESESSMB303.ericsson.se> <DFB2C14B-9C6D-4393-A9B4-434D58C9DED7@trammell.ch> <CAD6AjGTuHwW+RY3hc6+DmY=T2RT847HZ_RNbNmByumc45zQ-8A@mail.gmail.com> <7CFB38B0-F4E9-4C49-AEA0-FFA3E5BD41B0@trammell.ch> <CAD6AjGQiBs6BTs5g10o3JBeNBaYywBwAiwi27sm8wfJ=Rg=Aiw@mail.gmail.com> <8916881C-11C8-43C8-9466-1261CD4AF878@trammell.ch> <55B2723C.4090203@isi.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 19:43:58 +0200
Message-ID: <CAA93jw6jUp5_cXqz5xc1s-EuZamfaRXkbEX61oEAy0c7FEXgdg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
To: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/stackevo-discuss/HWMbNCiaiOVOSCGN5GbuBr9-cT8>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 00:59:45 -0700
Cc: Brian Trammell <ietf@trammell.ch>, Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com>, "draft-byrne-opsec-udp-advisory@tools.ietf.org" <draft-byrne-opsec-udp-advisory@tools.ietf.org>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>, stackevo-discuss@iab.org
Subject: Re: [Stackevo-discuss] [tsvwg] [Stackevo] draft-byrne-opsec-udp-advisory
X-BeenThere: stackevo-discuss@iab.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IP Stack Evolution Discussion List <stackevo-discuss.iab.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/options/stackevo-discuss>, <mailto:stackevo-discuss-request@iab.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/stackevo-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:stackevo-discuss@iab.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stackevo-discuss-request@iab.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/stackevo-discuss>, <mailto:stackevo-discuss-request@iab.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 17:44:00 -0000

I note that udplite is widely available, understood by bsd and linux,
passed by at least a few firewalls, and if you don't use the reduced
checksum feature, indistinguishable from udp... and one line of app
code to use...

... and widely underused. I did quite a bit of testing of it on ipv6
paths, and even converted a few tools like mosh and netperf to use it
for a while. Attempting to at least measure how well udplite gets
around would be a starting place for a new protocol, and at least
probing for the ability to use it in, say, quic might make some
headway.

My overall objection, however, to a new connectionless protocol for
"good udp applications" is that we had no idea how many crap udp
applications we had at the time we wrote them.

On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 7:13 PM, Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> wrote:
> I'm left with the following questions:
>
> - if you want a new UDP protocol number, why not just us 33 (DCCP)?
>
> - if NATs would not be an issue to a new transport, why has it inhibited
> all the recent attempts? (DCCP, SCTP)
>
> Although I appreciate the implications on TAPS for "do what I mean"
> negotiation of alternate transports, TAPS doesn't solve either of the
> issues above.
>
> AFAICT, they both highlight:
>
> a) why this is hard
>
> b) why this doesn't actually need a new IANA transport protocol codepoint
>
> Joe
>



-- 
Dave Täht
worldwide bufferbloat report:
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/results/bufferbloat
And:
What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone?
https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/makewififast