Re: [tcpm] draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum
"Biswas, Anumita" <Anumita.Biswas@netapp.com> Thu, 10 June 2010 18:36 UTC
Return-Path: <Anumita.Biswas@netapp.com>
X-Original-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3810328C162 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:36:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 FB6LcpUFj7PK for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:36:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx2.netapp.com (mx2.netapp.com [216.240.18.37]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFE4728C12A for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:36:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,399,1272870000"; d="scan'208";a="379347625"
Received: from smtp2.corp.netapp.com ([10.57.159.114]) by mx2-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 10 Jun 2010 11:35:56 -0700
Received: from sacrsexc2-prd.hq.netapp.com (sacrsexc2-prd.hq.netapp.com [10.99.115.28]) by smtp2.corp.netapp.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/NTAP-1.6) with ESMTP id o5AIZlg2023298; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:35:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SACMVEXC2-PRD.hq.netapp.com ([10.99.115.18]) by sacrsexc2-prd.hq.netapp.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:35:47 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:35:20 -0700
Message-ID: <A3D02FB7C6883741952C425A59E261A5097324A2@SACMVEXC2-PRD.hq.netapp.com>
In-Reply-To: <4C10EE60.4010402@isi.edu>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [tcpm] draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum
Thread-Index: AcsIpKDbUcjCAATNTAK2WmplBcpLrAAJsZSQ
From: "Biswas, Anumita" <Anumita.Biswas@netapp.com>
To: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>, "Scheffenegger, Richard" <rs@netapp.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Jun 2010 18:35:47.0248 (UTC) FILETIME=[BE315B00:01CB08CB]
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org, "Anantha Ramaiah (ananth)" <ananth@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 18:36:47 -0000
> -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Touch [mailto:touch@isi.edu] > Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2010 6:54 AM > To: Scheffenegger, Richard > Cc: tcpm@ietf.org; Anantha Ramaiah (ananth) > Subject: Re: [tcpm] draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum > > > Hi, Richard, > > Scheffenegger, Richard wrote: > > Hi Joe, > > > > I think you mentioned that a checksum violation in TLS will > cause the > > connection to be aborted - rather than the corrupted packet to be > > resent... > > Yes - TLS operates at the application layer, not in > conjunction with TCP. > > > If keeping the standard TCP CRC intact (and covering TCP header & > > data) and having an RFC1146 alternate checksum that works > differently > > than defined therein, perhaps it would be better to make it > a new TCP > > option then. > > Defined therein where? http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum/ Section 3 - "Negotiating the use of CRC 32C" The alternate checksum isn't TLS; TLS > is an application-layer security protocol. > > > During handshake, the CRC-32C capable sender would need to do the > > proper think (retry one or two times with all options, and > then retry > > with the minimum options); For agnostic middleboxes (and NAT/PAT > > routers currently deployed), not covering the pseudo-header > seems to > > me to be the only option, to make this feature work with existing > > gear... > > RFC1146 defines a handshake behavior, during which only a > short label is exchanged and confirmed, and the conventional > TCP checksum is used. This is more appropriate for TCP; > options in the SYN should not render the rest of the SYN > unintelligible to parties that don't support the option. > > As to retry with or without options, that is not typically > defined at the level of a TCP option. That too is application > behavior - i.e., to try to open a TCP connection with certain > parameters, and to try a different attempt if the first > fails. Having an option redefine core TCP protocol behavior > (such as timeouts, retries, etc.) seems more than just an > option. Options should extend, not redefine, that core behavior. > > ... > > As there exist HW that implements SCTP checksum offloading > (as well as > > segmentation) nowadays, new appliactions could probably make use of > > that. However, applications would have to revert back to TCP (with > > small segments), if the other side wouldn't support SCTP. > > Yes. But that's what you've described above when the TCP > handshake fails - i.e., that's no different. It's worth > thinking further about that, as a result. > > Joe > >
- [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Lars Eggert
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Ron Bonica
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Hagen Paul Pfeifer
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Anantha Ramaiah (ananth)
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Lars Eggert
- [tcpm] draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum (was:… Lars Eggert
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 L.Wood
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Duke, Martin
- Re: [tcpm] draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Hagen Paul Pfeifer
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 L.Wood
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Hagen Paul Pfeifer
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Alejandro Acosta
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Anantha Ramaiah (ananth)
- Re: [tcpm] draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum Scheffenegger, Richard
- Re: [tcpm] draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum L.Wood
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 L.Wood
- Re: [tcpm] draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum Scheffenegger, Richard
- Re: [tcpm] draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum Scheffenegger, Richard
- Re: [tcpm] draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum Biswas, Anumita
- Re: [tcpm] draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum Biswas, Anumita
- Re: [tcpm] draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] draft-anumita-tcpm-stronger-checksum Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Lars Eggert
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Hagen Paul Pfeifer
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 David Ros
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Lars Eggert
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Alexander Zimmermann
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Yuchung Cheng
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[ASRC AEROSPACE CORP]
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Anantha Ramaiah (ananth)
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Scheffenegger, Richard
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Scheffenegger, Richard
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Fernando Gont
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 L.Wood
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 L.Wood
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 L.Wood
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Biswas, Anumita
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Biswas, Anumita
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 L.Wood
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 rick jones
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 rick jones
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Lars Eggert
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Scheffenegger, Richard
- Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00 Joe Touch