IETF Logo Mail Archive

[tsvwg] Re: UDP options [was IP Parcels and Advanced Jumbos (AJs)]

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sat, 28 September 2024 03:02 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.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 B6E47C151983; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 20:02:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.108 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id th8SWMMvOQvv; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 20:02:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pj1-x102f.google.com (mail-pj1-x102f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102f]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F05DC1516EA; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 20:02:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pj1-x102f.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2e0b9bca173so1216308a91.0; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 20:02:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1727492548; x=1728097348; darn=ietf.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=CKVq/TTlQDNaKOcva0Pc3w/vl5slUvkW+ZoYuM6bDP4=; b=H+J2sQG8meyrEqyH7X7Za5IrX3+YfWatkZf4/jdYA2Pb4qwGaucmbix9pDPkqM+xXm pBPysesXtU9k6XtqBK5kfesua1vNOYDnPvozM6w0yimjMgCsiQxfksFy6llOCcQSOaT+ yFshVP59+5F4876vlAxoJsXsvPqCETK8FKxuejSgrHC6d9BcgYvdD5A3fAGkPPkc6lLv 9CZDkfNHtoO6betn66gXCNNj9TKSLfH0wwE+XR/19dcuDCC8HdN3nZcdA99JpRYVksew qYS4vue4DwEq/pPrT5ppyuWExKTI6fXV2aSXF22yv6BIdtUa3ZV9CXuJSikWVj+2pLaR 0yrQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1727492548; x=1728097348; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=CKVq/TTlQDNaKOcva0Pc3w/vl5slUvkW+ZoYuM6bDP4=; b=ruhyX8qOvxJsmgRm9yBfXNjlrWGz3/sKJGUveYHlyEnZZdYmDq+KTfoh4242q0hQL9 PqkLyhZTM0TLXYWlTrsA2G80kVudb32E6hNEhLcODuJSHw1ZS/NfCntsyfkikqPH6xkJ +LO+7LvIE0xGQsQXQQDk24WXjs3COGFkz+WkGSNBUMJyJ8vy/PRljlQEKi/tmjzkN+aU DDwEIMRpG32tCzNjljIhwK4yTJaMhtP+TEmq6Hgstukn5HfCRt+zUozSn5M46FNyIXmh WlshriWqX6gTi4C7UgFph9YuKytUi9QEWI+aQ6pgZ/GVJ7us5xGFLXvm6N77SQN4PF+i nMwQ==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVplIq0zUIVD68sAKpcWZArtdEPV5dfrtpfA3NOOwCksJ5N059Un7V5x7at+B1cDXNsDYapsLP0zA==@ietf.org, AJvYcCWR3xZa4a95+EH7hblcrYqYacvFwE60sFVKIgpaFwyGF+g3b6p7ZbhcrHQz5jYd4ZRPOVYZV5o=@ietf.org, AJvYcCXRPmdAnDBkK+235bH4CMY+nYOmD8YBbmoEjp1dvJNqlffbzkJjiy9ShjsaufZtgnz6Yol2Yw==@ietf.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzW0uUN47zatX7lU3iz+a1O8sU4KJ4/syMSb3wNQIfTJKzTGdhA xNERsYehTpqmXJcp4urX61mn2gR+EN8u0GSELsTjgu97XubaBGSxx9CQuGoW
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHJlBqtBxL4a1ayxEfwGVIbbfQoNrKg5DC1kmMfTn7OK3RkEJzn8DZtwwjBsuOLUkoiZX4G7A==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:f2cf:b0:2e0:b26c:9069 with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2e0b8ea648cmr5686483a91.25.1727492547611; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 20:02:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPV6:2404:4400:541d:a600:44b7:2c2e:2bc6:8707? ([2404:4400:541d:a600:44b7:2c2e:2bc6:8707]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 98e67ed59e1d1-2e0b6e13d01sm2875992a91.42.2024.09.27.20.02.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 27 Sep 2024 20:02:27 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <b57cb059-9fb8-4fac-8015-1d98dc99efa0@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2024 15:02:23 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
To: "touch@strayalpha.com" <touch@strayalpha.com>, "Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
References: <BN0P110MB14206BEECA8F0D481B06E89CA368A@BN0P110MB1420.NAMP110.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <9a15800e-c23a-4696-9d30-5c1dc9e4363b@redbarn.org> <DB9PR07MB7771C8EDF5A23CA4897EF42AD66A2@DB9PR07MB7771.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <CALx6S34x3QnWtcKTR18gpoW6Po04GdE+ytGKneh92CdvnPkK-g@mail.gmail.com> <BN0P110MB14208BCE5095F728C99C3FF9A36AA@BN0P110MB1420.NAMP110.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <0f5bd363-22d5-4dfc-956d-2f69401c15b3@gmail.com> <BN0P110MB142062BB61C46A826EFCA3A3A36AA@BN0P110MB1420.NAMP110.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <1e4c3c53-d2c5-4e19-af9d-d41cf369282b@gmail.com> <BN0P110MB1420F6B4D278E3CFA9E406E8A36BA@BN0P110MB1420.NAMP110.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <491AF3F1-8B91-4A70-8202-54DC33F656AB@strayalpha.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <491AF3F1-8B91-4A70-8202-54DC33F656AB@strayalpha.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Message-ID-Hash: IZGIV22UNOSU76ZUIWRAWOTRMYG6QLND
X-Message-ID-Hash: IZGIV22UNOSU76ZUIWRAWOTRMYG6QLND
X-MailFrom: brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tsvwg.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: Tim Chown <Tim.Chown@jisc.ac.uk>, Internet Area <Int-area@ietf.org>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>, tsvwg IETF list <tsvwg@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [tsvwg] Re: UDP options [was IP Parcels and Advanced Jumbos (AJs)]
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/7qi_mOtgRg-b8x_XI2b9e_MkF_4>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:tsvwg-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:tsvwg-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:tsvwg-leave@ietf.org>

Joe,
On 28-Sep-24 03:13, touch@strayalpha.com wrote:
> 
>> On Sep 27, 2024, at 7:58 AM, Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin=40boeing.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Indeed. But if sendmsg() and recvmsg() can and do generate RFC2675 packets, it means that any discussion of obsoleting RFC2675 should be
>>> off the table.
>>
>> No one that I know of has suggested obsoleting RFC2675 - my documents do not say "obsoletes" (nor even "updates”).
> 
> That approach to UDP jumbo grams is incompatible with UDP options.
> 
> And yes, there was a proposal to move that RFC to historic:
> 
> 
> Jones, T., G. Fairhurst, "Change Status of RFC 2675 to Historic," draft-jones-6man-historic-rfc2675, May 2019.
> 
> 
> We COULD have a new option with a longer length, but that’s not in our baseline draft.

Wouldn't that be tricky, because the options follow the whole payload as I understand it? So a JumboUDPgram has to be received in full, however big it is, before the option saying that it's a jumbo can be received and interpreted.

Where the udp-options draft says:

>> The technique has been proposed for deprecation [Jo19].

I think you'd better change it to something like:

The technique is known to be in active use in special situations, so cannot reasonably be deprecated. However, users of this technique cannot simultaneously use UDP options.

     Brian

v2.37.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status