IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] UDP Options: on forcing the use of UDP CS=0 in connection with FRAG+LITE

Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Tue, 02 July 2019 00:08 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.com>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B758120186 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 17:08:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.22
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.22 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strayalpha.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 6WXc67Xn03of for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 17:08:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server217-3.web-hosting.com (server217-3.web-hosting.com [198.54.115.226]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A066E1200CE for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 17:08:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=To:References:Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:From:Subject:Mime-Version: Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=kyXQV8/qG3O9yICOWV9R30CilScUPzJ7mPh+qYP08oU=; b=rrzjFJqp6MSf6viFQcl5AuS0h XhB0+Vbng53PzW0GBZxdzcMsf3uE76qkxMRGDkUIrBYy0KH93D+XQnEXpr78fDtSjA32GyDTwHY5m 4C39OKKx37Cy/toBCj6prk9OfHWa7hRnU/NJ0fILSDfEV4ARHhDR6mHA5a1cay6wmuCb9kQqzYOdo Y0OAHz9ZXLOzrXi6Llno85kgCWn/MwYWuVUg87idyHjTJC8o+oEUqnsQc6Ew+GIVZGHMnpxIIeKhh x73CtyVBv/lUKmER1Nf7xhivNIO3g/LU5Yid5NEBEGH3tzr5y5OLB6aNxCRs9bUtg6oAhs/UQvw8M zoa7FlcuA==;
Received: from [172.58.23.225] (port=42824 helo=[IPv6:2607:fb90:e756:326a:cc61:9312:a5c:ea6]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1hi6L6-002nny-QW; Mon, 01 Jul 2019 20:08:16 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16F203)
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S34zY74fhqbXxmiyturfu5mxFjRtA4=R48haX9tP6qLcow@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2019 17:08:03 -0700
Cc: "C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>, TSVWG <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A1C8FAD8-E189-410F-A6AD-D6F53E486BAE@strayalpha.com>
References: <CACL_3VHGtMz3htgfFLRGhjXm=qC7kOXQs+cchtamhh-giBnpLA@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S35T9ApzMaoSVgHSJPpcpfXsbHHogoBbEjMPj6vH-kxYeA@mail.gmail.com> <CACL_3VE6kr33Vk5si5AxSZNmhqysZZGoy6HK37COUgwbvcRkdA@mail.gmail.com> <24692A9B-4AF1-4E32-A760-7D4908A61262@strayalpha.com> <CACL_3VExhAdFCu-kFLLO5DeRYUOFyJztUgJg-vQmnPoecvzeJg@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S34zY74fhqbXxmiyturfu5mxFjRtA4=R48haX9tP6qLcow@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/5rMRNcdursNJ3-eslOpVl_wjQGA>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] UDP Options: on forcing the use of UDP CS=0 in connection with FRAG+LITE
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 02 Jul 2019 00:08:26 -0000


> On Jul 1, 2019, at 2:56 PM, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> wrote:
> 
> The pseudo header in
> the UDP checksum includes the IP addresses which provides protection
> against misdelivery when addresses are corrupted

I’d wager NAT boxes corrupt more addresses than anything else, but they fix the checksum. 

So why would not including these fields matter?

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email