IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Syslog] AD review discuss/comments for draft-ietf-syslog-dtls

Tim Evens <tim@evensweb.com> Wed, 26 May 2010 06:17 UTC

Return-Path: <tim@evensweb.com>
X-Original-To: syslog@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: syslog@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25B733A687A for <syslog@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 May 2010 23:17:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.74
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.74 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.74]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HVULFfqNXQsP for <syslog@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 May 2010 23:17:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from outbound1.bluetie.com (outbound1.bluetie.com [206.65.164.140]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 521023A6874 for <syslog@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 May 2010 23:17:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from emta1.nyc1.bluetie.com ([10.102.1.160]) by outbound1.bluetie.com with outbound001 id N6H01e0023T7zWJ016H0KY; Wed, 26 May 2010 02:17:00 -0400
X-CMAE-Score: 0.00
X-CMAE-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=wBrC3rn4ndyg7G79calUHzfpKuqQZwOCAVwTYTfHEQw= c=1 sm=1 a=YtVw0_ETJMMA:10 a=uEzv4HemXiYA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=paXBUIBQ3N+qoNG038GKvg==:17 a=9qxNCY_qAAAA:8 a=BofgxN_9TwrvQkb7lKEA:9 a=Ih-5s7xsTiOhWYctCQc4oijrr0sA:4 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=1pxjJC3EenQA:10 a=J3G4CyWmZqSAU3rV:21 a=mRUqr2AHrDW4Sj49:21 a=kefG/y7aXFJRfTdPUUcKYA==:117
Received: from [10.19.220.121] (128-107-239-233.cisco.com [128.107.239.233]) by emta1.nyc1.bluetie.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E335280081; Wed, 26 May 2010 02:11:47 -0400 (EDT)
References: <20100525101440.27134@web2.nyc1.bluetie.com> <808FD6E27AD4884E94820BC333B2DB775BC0E0952B@NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com>
Message-Id: <A8E39E1C-FAF8-47BC-BC61-A87A711E14A7@evensweb.com>
From: Tim Evens <tim@evensweb.com>
To: "<Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com>" <Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <808FD6E27AD4884E94820BC333B2DB775BC0E0952B@NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (7E18)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPhone Mail 7E18)
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 23:16:55 -0700
Cc: "<syslog@ietf.org>" <syslog@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Syslog] AD review discuss/comments for draft-ietf-syslog-dtls
X-BeenThere: syslog@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Issues in Network Event Logging <syslog.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog>, <mailto:syslog-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/syslog>
List-Post: <mailto:syslog@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:syslog-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog>, <mailto:syslog-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 06:17:11 -0000

Interesting because RFC4347 IMHO states clearly that IP fragmentation  
(IP not UDP) must be avoided and thus dtls must determine the MTU.

** Sent from my tiny phone keyboard **

On May 25, 2010, at 11:03 PM, <Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com> wrote:

> Tim Evens wrote:
>> Correct, in RFC5426 the max size is 64K which is the max length in
>> UDP.  UDP sizes of greater than MTU are only achievable via IP layer
>> fragmentation, as you also indicated.  I'm under the impression that
>> DTLS does NOT support IPv4 fragmentation since in RFC4347 it states
>> in Section 4.1.1 "Each DTLS record MUST fit within a single
>> datagram."
>
> AFAIK when running DTLS over UDP, "datagram" here refers to UDP
> datagrams, not IP packets (and one UDP datagram can be split
> to several IP packets).
>
> Best regards,
> Pasi

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email