Re: [sunset4] future of dnssec?

"Heatley, Nick" <nick.heatley@ee.co.uk> Thu, 23 February 2017 14:11 UTC

Return-Path: <nick.heatley@ee.co.uk>
X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8AB2129868 for <sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 06:11:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.087
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.087 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-1.887, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 aGK1SHhuL9Xd for <sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 06:11:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail1.bemta6.messagelabs.com (mail1.bemta6.messagelabs.com [193.109.254.111]) (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 442E412985A for <sunset4@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 06:11:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [193.109.254.147] by server-7.bemta-6.messagelabs.com id D0/04-24539-C9DEEA85; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:11:40 +0000
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprNKsWRWlGSWpSXmKPExsUy9d9HH905b9d FGOxTsuhasYfZ4sqL+ywWK/fsZ3dg9liy5CeTx4PH75g91n0wD2COYs3MS8qvSGDNuHCysGCV YMXKt0/ZGxgP8HUxcnEICWxhlFg4eSUbhHOAUeJP01tWCOcEo8ScZ30sXYycHGwCuhLts1Yxg 9giAgoSbW9fMYHYzAKhEjvvTmUEsYUFNCTe7T4GFOcAqtGUmP7RE6I8SqLh8AewMSwCqhL7Nh 5jBbF5gVrnzJkC1iokMJlZ4vUVDRCbU8BK4vanG2BxRgFZiS+Nq5khVolL3HoyH2ythICAxJI 955khbFGJl4//sULYChKXFnWxQtTrSCzY/YkNwtaWWLbwNTPEXkGJkzOfsExgFJ2FZOwsJC2z kLTMQtKygJFlFaN6cWpRWWqRrpleUlFmekZJbmJmjq6hgZlebmpxcWJ6ak5iUrFecn7uJkZgR DEAwQ7GeSf8DzFKcjApifI+u7guQogvKT+lMiOxOCO+qDQntfgQowwHh5IE7/03QDnBotT01I q0zBxgbMOkJTh4lER4dYHxLcRbXJCYW5yZDpE6xajLcWTzkTdMQix5+XmpUuK820FmCIAUZZT mwY2ApZlLjLJSwryMQEcJ8RSkFuVmlqDKv2IU52BUEubdDTKFJzOvBG7TK6AjmICOsHReC3JE SSJCSqqB8fqvvJ1Vq/v/nZtf8kZ3SVG4aWaZSHXpsVB9K8cfP/yN79bf3bvhIPfGHzzmPJs+t z94Z3rsAfOtbRWhcx/JNHV2T1zPkpw44Us+y5mmBduWxG32X5SUmS/ZaJnmzFhuuWPiXw0eHe fZhlNdZi+/5+m203zfAdMphevTJ9yZqV/+vEdtUbZMuxJLcUaioRZzUXEiACuT+5kuAwAA
X-Env-Sender: nick.heatley@ee.co.uk
X-Msg-Ref: server-8.tower-27.messagelabs.com!1487859099!78253732!1
X-Originating-IP: [149.254.241.76]
X-StarScan-Received:
X-StarScan-Version: 9.2.3; banners=-,-,-
X-VirusChecked: Checked
Received: (qmail 10092 invoked from network); 23 Feb 2017 14:11:39 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO smtpml01.ee.co.uk) (149.254.241.76) by server-8.tower-27.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted SMTP; 23 Feb 2017 14:11:39 -0000
Received: from EEUKWV0940.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK (Not Verified[10.246.209.217]) by smtpml01.ee.co.uk with Trustwave SEG (v7, 5, 6, 8438) id <B58aeed960001>; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:11:34 +0000
Received: from UK30S005EXS02.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK (Not Verified[10.246.208.14]) by EEUKWV0940.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK with Trustwave SEG (v7, 3, 6, 7949) id <B58aeed9a0005>; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:11:38 +0000
Received: from UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK ([fe80::314c:b96c:4a9a:8a79]) by UK30S005EXS02.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK ([2002:62c:2a4f::62c:2a4f]) with mapi id 14.03.0279.002; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:11:37 +0000
From: "Heatley, Nick" <nick.heatley@ee.co.uk>
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
Thread-Topic: [sunset4] future of dnssec?
Thread-Index: AdKNBnRIe2inw1ZcRtC42Vzko3pn/gADhDcAAAEj9/oAANTjAAAMrNV3ABzaT4AABM3muwAB0iyQ
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:11:36 +0000
Message-ID: <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B21334D575CE@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK>
References: <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B21334D566F0@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK> <B5E8C545-55B9-4ECB-B0C8-C3EEFEECD320@fugue.com> <20170222143629.9E9C56454B08@rock.dv.isc.org> <8C2DC5DB-88CA-4541-BE50-C23088F77867@viagenie.ca> <20170222210305.97EB36455CD0@rock.dv.isc.org> <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B21334D5732A@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK> <20170223130652.4D3A664684D7@rock.dv.isc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20170223130652.4D3A664684D7@rock.dv.isc.org>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.246.208.5]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sunset4/8OOUawd-XrLTSGxjcuyTJMEC_Yw>
Cc: Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>, "sunset4@ietf.org" <sunset4@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sunset4] future of dnssec?
X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list <sunset4.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sunset4>, <mailto:sunset4-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sunset4/>
List-Post: <mailto:sunset4@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sunset4-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4>, <mailto:sunset4-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:11:44 -0000

It is not the phone where the blocker is, Mark.
It is Core Network "policy, control and charging".
Encapsulation obstructs any IP function that must be performed prior to the NAT to the outside.



-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Andrews [mailto:marka@isc.org] 
Sent: 23 February 2017 13:07
To: Heatley, Nick
Cc: Marc Blanchet; sunset4@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [sunset4] future of dnssec?


In message <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B21334D5732A@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.C
O.UK>, "Heatley, Nick" writes:
> Some networks do not work successfully with the additional encapsulation.
> Mobile networks are the case in point.
> So the translation tech rightfully exists.

464XLAT is encapsulation with translation.  It drops the IPv4 path MTU from 1500 to 1480.  DS-Lite drops the IPv4 MTU to 1460.  You can't avoid the issue with tethered equipement.

For TCP connection initiatiate from the host you shouldn't be seeing PMTU issues with either 464XLAT or DS-Lite as both should be presenting iterface MTU that doesn't result in PTB's being generated by the teco's equipement.  For 464XLAT the mss should be that of IPv6.  For DS-Lite in the host mode the mss should be 20 bytes smaller.

Or can't the phone manufactures actually do DS-Lite host mode properly if they were to try?

Encapsulation in the connection initiating device is different to encapsulation in the middle of the path.  You start out with a smaller MTU.

Mark

NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER
This email contains BT information, which may be privileged or confidential. It's meant only for the individual(s) or entity named above. 
If you're not the intended recipient, note that disclosing, copying, distributing or using this information is prohibited. 
If you've received this email in error, please let me know immediately on the email address above. Thank you.

We monitor our email system, and may record your emails.

EE Limited 
Registered office:Trident Place, Mosquito Way, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, AL10 9BW
Registered in England no: 02382161

EE Limited is a wholly owned subsidiary of:

British Telecommunications plc
Registered office: 81 Newgate Street London EC1A 7AJ
Registered in England no: 1800000