IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] usage for timestamp options in the wild

Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@google.com> Wed, 26 September 2018 18:37 UTC

Return-Path: <ycheng@google.com>
X-Original-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F39E127332 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 11:37:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.502
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 KbKlZCGkoCzv for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 11:37:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it1-x135.google.com (mail-it1-x135.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::135]) (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 A5CED130E07 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 11:37:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it1-x135.google.com with SMTP id q70-v6so4376561itb.3 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 11:37:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=djnYxPZOZF3gcBFW5mSJ/iRiLArE5/YCkSS7q5QO+Nk=; b=nQmsnFe+eBgrnbZnNVtGfIrV8CrXCuyX4/7Ya/9w/ELs+Goe14hLd8ynsAyp8/kpeF mgpchWcBHOH5RGubPTo8QeV8cYxp3YPnfiXHrxrqeifJLzvKGMAdp45GN2JUNOZSQGPt NDmzKe/fXi+6nnxZ2b543RymJpeKBA75g7yzEhrEarj6holrUVo11ShFHru9wKDdW44o oMyy7oYcgAct6K/WOdLXLMwPanSVEZjGOC+6oAHoM5QmX9v/8JGQn/+oMy7FyPlygXhe bEjz3aTXacyqYOjtrUhAxT0QraRkwU9Q5VtW5DwzEBW9OcSDMjhPlu9EilqMA2WzcxIr V55Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=djnYxPZOZF3gcBFW5mSJ/iRiLArE5/YCkSS7q5QO+Nk=; b=gpPzRLnwR6GgUl/jHlSNHoLH0hcR/fSF5eawpTyQM2rXAgpLanjHYQuQYYbrSSYnGO LL9ddJQHdhIcppNL5PW0zpcF37iM11kw10+URf3+ScF6RPEAcgyj5tUh6i8yql7jdTzf HNzZ3PDILRW8SJYNLNF3NJa9sYs7WPeUfJAWWrLhqqamX4EMO0f6saqcClgCU6p2o2Dg zlCbEN5gPWymTP4FnpCakK4sgtFUpIw/bNY55CPnBFH82o8SDGDVNmpdlF6lGjYzB3RO H+mzwbXighTPn47hJ8JoruStdOq1d3JAW76GhyLZuM1CPlQh4Yh3hsgsDWZH5tB3bvov Ws2w==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfoi4slXFWfMklRpb1E1jDsB3dBmPnAN89e3RbmulteIEjmL1+sy2 j0Au7IhvUNkfac1MdvqObY40Pv1bW7mdhJoc3X1YJg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV636iKL6RaHjTZBP33x0IUCHqkXaKSggwSPNeaxCmkLjV6NOl0S1O9tL6DvaJzYYHjy/IkTLdcM2xg4UjtMGVzo=
X-Received: by 2002:a02:3f11:: with SMTP id d17-v6mr6787907jaa.36.1537987070490; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 11:37:50 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a6b:f715:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 11:37:09 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <MWHPR21MB019123F8820BE88FEAA2A9FBB6150@MWHPR21MB0191.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CAO249yd-3PBzjtO+Jgpz-qDTROgoKJEQetJTxiepJ34LPqZG+w@mail.gmail.com> <MWHPR21MB019123F8820BE88FEAA2A9FBB6150@MWHPR21MB0191.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
From: Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@google.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 11:37:09 -0700
Message-ID: <CAK6E8=fdswhzTKs6-cdCj7Q=Cuu288tK--48sj4Jvrw28aqh8g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Praveen Balasubramanian <pravb=40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: Yoshifumi Nishida <nishida@sfc.wide.ad.jp>, "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/e0WMtoTmVJcaCrJQYaUjoZxVliY>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] usage for timestamp options in the wild
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tcpm/>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 18:37:54 -0000

On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 11:21 AM, Praveen Balasubramanian
<pravb=40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
> Windows doesn’t do timestamp option by default. It’s 10 byte per packet overhead for marginal benefits.
>
>
>
> From: tcpm <tcpm-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Yoshifumi Nishida
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2018 10:49 AM
> To: tcpm@ietf.org
> Subject: [tcpm] usage for timestamp options in the wild
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
> this is just out of my curiosity.
>
> I've checked traffic archives in CAIDA (https://data.caida.org/datasets/) and WIDE (http://mawi.wide..ad.jp/mawi/) on a whim and tried to see how many connections utilize timestamps.
>
>
>
> As far as I've checked some archives recently captured, it seems that around 60-70% TCP connections use timestamp option. But, this ratio seems to be a bit lower as I thought most of implementations these days support TS option and activate it by default.
how recent are the archives?

AFAIK TS is enabled by default on Linux, FreeBSD, and iOS. Linux has
that by default more than a decade

>
> Does anyone have some ideas about it? Am I looking at uncommon data? Or there are still many old implementations around? Or, many users have disabled the option for some reasons?
>
> --
>
> Yoshi
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> tcpm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email