[tcpm] Adding Support for Stronger Error Detection Codes in TCP for Jumbo Frames
"Biswas, Anumita" <Anumita.Biswas@netapp.com> Wed, 26 May 2010 23:07 UTC
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 927C93A6A56 for <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Wed, 26 May 2010 16:07:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([188.8.131.52]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D6cQr2xCKSpF for <email@example.com>; Wed, 26 May 2010 16:07:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx2.netapp.com (mx2.netapp.com [184.108.40.206]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 877023A6A55 for <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Wed, 26 May 2010 16:07:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.53,307,1272870000"; d="scan'208,217"; a="368219007"
Received: from smtp1.corp.netapp.com ([10.57.156.124]) by mx2-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 26 May 2010 16:07:02 -0700
Received: from sacrsexc2-prd.hq.netapp.com (sacrsexc2-prd.hq.netapp.com [10.99.115.28]) by smtp1.corp.netapp.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/NTAP-1.6) with ESMTP id o4QN72n5008439 for <email@example.com>; Wed, 26 May 2010 16:07:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SACMVEXC2-PRD.hq.netapp.com ([10.99.115.17]) by sacrsexc2-prd.hq.netapp.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 26 May 2010 16:07:02 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CAFD28.266BF0F2"
Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 16:07:01 -0700
Thread-Topic: Adding Support for Stronger Error Detection Codes in TCP for Jumbo Frames
From: "Biswas, Anumita" <Anumita.Biswas@netapp.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 May 2010 23:07:02.0555 (UTC) FILETIME=[26D5DEB0:01CAFD28]
Subject: [tcpm] Adding Support for Stronger Error Detection Codes in TCP for Jumbo Frames
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 23:07:12 -0000
Hello, An internet-draft on "Support for Stronger Error Detection Codes in TCP for Jumbo Frames" has been submitted. It can be found at http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum-00.txt <http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum-00.txt> Any feedback, discussion and comments would be highly appreciated. Many thanks, Anumita Biswas Abstract: There is a class of data serving protocols and applications that cannot tolerate undetected data corruption on the wire. Data corruption could occur at the source in software, in the network interface card, out on the link, on intermediate routers or at the destination network interface card or node. The Ethernet CRC and the 16-bit checksum in the TCP/UDP headers are used to detect data errors. Most applications rely on these checksums to detect data corruptions and do not use any checksums or CRC checks at their level. Research has shown that the TCP/UDP checksums are catching a significant number of errors, however, the research suggests that one packet in 10 billion will have an error that goes undetected for Ethernet MTU frames (MTU of 1500). Under certain situations, "bad" hosts can introduce undetected errors at a much higher frequency and order. With the use of Jumbo frames on the rise, and therefore more data bits on the wire that could be corrupted, the current 16-bit TCP/UDP checksum, or the Ethernet 32-bit CRC are simply not sufficient for detecting errors. This document specifies a proposal to use stronger checksum algorithms for TCP Jumbo Frames for IPv4 and IPv6 networks. The Castagnoli CRC 32C algorithm used in iSCSI and SCTP is proposed as the error detection code of choice.
- [tcpm] Adding Support for Stronger Error Detectio… Biswas, Anumita