IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] Status of ECN encapsulation drafts (i.e., stuck)

Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Sun, 15 March 2020 19:50 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 85B183A1B59 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 12:50:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.318
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.318 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 02tr95kCHO5T for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 12:50:44 -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 5DDEB3A1B57 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 12:50:44 -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:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To: From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding: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=FM0b+4OrL4qxIR4q1izp3wuEw6tVjFNs32eVVPIDJbk=; b=vIBuYg9QnDKejiCvv06sML4Tx rnRla45nyo0jM8OfvjmBWYParMhcBtl7VMmKRdnJzjvwhAQAFh4z8iYcM/XDp/n3FslOIh6MM25Mk XyevXoEqSIxsAKzldyqgjlnSjvnG/vm2nu8p/eKGi5El5PGKxqPOEGA7X7+KsCHgCp0+Bj6/J/c+v PAJdaJSwYYNP9ucxxO7Mg00xaAoqWuoe0U6Ca8qYmYPM9x0Bxc1TbZXzXwBuAzvUWvRS9140JWDf5 cESZu6WMOkbAALaBy8InEZyzZQzefjBOnCq/j9utPxZhxWc4ZjtGjGWw05J6ca/aEVdDacIXJDqKY Ffrtlgulw==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-225-198.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.225.198]:52154 helo=[192.168.1.10]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1jDZHQ-0038mk-VE; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 15:50:41 -0400
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B9703650-FAFB-45C6-8226-1DBA0C36C12C"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
In-Reply-To: <202003151730.02FHUSbk089224@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2020 12:50:34 -0700
Cc: Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <BF815D6A-CD8E-45C0-8AB5-5F43ABE919F8@strayalpha.com>
References: <202003151730.02FHUSbk089224@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <ietf@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
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/IbPxUhaZG8dx2C4NU1KDMNcMZkc>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Status of ECN encapsulation drafts (i.e., stuck)
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: Sun, 15 Mar 2020 19:50:46 -0000


> On Mar 15, 2020, at 10:30 AM, Rodney W. Grimes <ietf@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> wrote:
> 
>> So yes, I know this is often done, but I don't know how often.
> 
> Probably more often than desireable.
> BUT this is done intentionally by an Operator, so I do not view
> this as a severe a problem as if there actually was an implementation
> that just flat out ignored DF.

See RFC6864 as to why this is risky.

Yes, it makes things look like they work. What the operators don’t see are the packets they corrupt by ignoring DF, e.g., when the ID is repeated or just constant.

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email