[Tsv-art] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-dprive-padding-policy-04
Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> Wed, 04 April 2018 09:30 UTC
Return-Path: <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: tsv-art@ietf.org
Delivered-To: tsv-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07C34127137; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 02:30:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
To: tsv-art@ietf.org
Cc: dns-privacy@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, draft-ietf-dprive-padding-policy.all@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.77.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <152283423399.24047.7890938303643675886@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 02:30:34 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsv-art/zcm8B_A9yB9gQh8QuzGFa-qrTas>
Subject: [Tsv-art] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-dprive-padding-policy-04
X-BeenThere: tsv-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
List-Id: Transport Area Review Team <tsv-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsv-art>, <mailto:tsv-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsv-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsv-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsv-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsv-art>, <mailto:tsv-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 09:30:34 -0000
Reviewer: Magnus Westerlund Review result: Ready with Issues I have reviewed this document as part of TSV-ART task to review documents with potential transport related issues. I note that the document in its final recommendation regarding block sizes do consider MTU for reasonable size choices. What I am missing in Section 4 is the discussion of MTU as impacting this. From my perspective, it appears reasonable to: In Section 4.1 consider if the Block Size will interact with the MTU. Especially for block sizes that are a small fraction of the MTU, unless the block is chosen so that a multiple just fits the MTU, the block padding may cause unnecessary fragmentation for UDP based delivery. Also chosing a block size larger than the MTU of course forces one to always fragment. In Section 4.2 I think depending on the negotiated size, the downside is that it will commonly result in a consistent number of fragments reducing delivery probability. I haven't digged into the negotiation part about maximum response size. But, I assume that this is not necessarily chose based on MTU constraints, but other limitations in the system. Note that these comments only applies for datagram based transport without its own fragmentation mechanism, e.g. UDP.
- [Tsv-art] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-d… Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [Tsv-art] Tsvart last call review of draft-ie… Alexander Mayrhofer