Re: Summary of proposed changes to draft-gont-tsvwg-source-quench

Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar> Wed, 01 December 2010 23:19 UTC

Return-Path: <fernando.gont.netbook.win@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CAC33A67E9 for <tsvwg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 15:19:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.364
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.364 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.235, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 JNnB7xyPclxg for <tsvwg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 15:19:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-gw0-f66.google.com (mail-gw0-f66.google.com [74.125.83.66]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C80A03A67C3 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 15:19:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: by gwj18 with SMTP id 18so4722651gwj.1 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:21:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :x-enigmail-version:openpgp:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=hOATy6QyAqPjkrl0r45FmKLWyZzX3plDXca+PADi4LM=; b=w1UZ5pZjqZZ9TKZMPvgPhT1IEhk39/JSa1VGrg5cyJDJP9iBQ31ExEV8pQCXArx5oY q45bQHl44a89YkFL7eKkwlFiFLBQtJO90xH5H1HSTLmwFWInh1IwYZsezQ8lr1kUdIZP K8wAb0Yoz3H/enC3iv/s3BThVTbV/EhqlU+Og=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:openpgp:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=viQoqKSJTVdkaAhh0H+0b4/itk2PyPxVF1cQ94uCZWKKyYBNkmdHhNikhTStxEKDq0 OgbM+LFI0HUhL4U+MmGv5bSdCCHd3lTXM2mijjaze3b47Vv9ArptHJ0fTIQcwNZztO0E 90CaxKAjs/LvkFFb4MJabZMh7JfboH3ADHwbs=
Received: by 10.101.167.29 with SMTP id u29mr6779186ano.166.1291245658302; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:20:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.2.3] (92-129-17-190.fibertel.com.ar [190.17.129.92]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 2sm494736anw.38.2010.12.01.15.20.54 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:20:57 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Fernando Gont <fernando.gont.netbook.win@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4CF6D853.2040800@gont.com.ar>
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 20:20:51 -0300
From: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100802 Thunderbird/3.1.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Summary of proposed changes to draft-gont-tsvwg-source-quench
References: <4CF6C471.9070304@gont.com.ar> <EB90E34A-D9F1-4EA6-B350-23BB9E331EC0@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <EB90E34A-D9F1-4EA6-B350-23BB9E331EC0@cisco.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1
OpenPGP: id=D076FFF1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk" <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>, tsvwg <tsvwg@ietf.org>, Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>, Antonio.DeSimone@jhuapl.edu
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tsvwg>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 23:19:47 -0000

Hi, Fred,

>> 2) Update the text in RFC 1812 that states "A router MAY ignore any
>> ICMP Source Quench messages it receives".
>> 
>> The resulting text would s/MAY/SHOULD/. This would align the 
>> requirements for routers with the requirements for hosts (of
>> ignoring ICMP SQs)
> 
> Perhaps. Personally, I think this is a matter of polishing the barn
> door. Are there any routers now that try to interpret a Source
> Quench? 

Not that I know of. There were, but they were updated while we were
producing RFC 5927 (see e.g.:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/products_security_advisory09186a0080436587.shtml)


> Do you expect folks to be building new IPv4 routers at some
> point in the future? 

Yes, as much as they build new IPv6 routers. -- put another way, I don't
think ipv6-only routers will be shipped in the near term. e.g., anyone
entering the business would have to implement both IPv4 and IPv6 (unless
they base their products on existing code, of course).


>> 5) Have this document obsolete RFC 1016 (Prue, W., and J. Postel,
>> "The Source Quench Introduced Delay (SQuID)")
>> 
>> So far I have received one positive comment about this one
>> (off-list). More comments needed/wanted.
> 
> Or make it experimental. 

Historic?


> Are there any SQuID implementations? 

Not that I know of. -- Could double-check, though.


> What would happen if we declared SQuID obsolete?

I guess it would be easier for a newcomer looking at the specs to figure
out that he should not bother with SQuID. (i.e., this is just
cleaning-up the specs tree).

Thanks!

Kind regards,
-- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1