IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] UDP-Options: UDP has two ???maximums???

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Wed, 07 April 2021 00:11 UTC

Return-Path: <vixie@redbarn.org>
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 53AA23A36F8 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 17:11:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 RVLMzKWVZvCf for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 17:11:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [IPv6:2001:559:8000:cd::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82EEB3A36F7 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Apr 2021 17:11:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by family.redbarn.org (Postfix, from userid 716) id 3BF747599B; Wed, 7 Apr 2021 00:11:35 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2021 00:11:35 +0000
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
To: Jeremy Harris <jgh@wizmail.org>
Cc: tsvwg@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20210407001135.bzxiqqx4cai6hp2t@family.redbarn.org>
References: <93556D3A-3C42-4944-9202-DE75AE864CBA@strayalpha.com> <853caba2-b7ce-db2e-338c-ad1d161a5fe9@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <48DA3058-3380-46AC-951E-27B28489AAF6@strayalpha.com> <846f084a-c441-1d2f-a858-e4d34d528c83@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <20210402231200.4q5czwbxswdneinr@family.redbarn.org> <2d36e27c-1470-35f9-3079-6a150e83c713@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <20210403202313.ojof3hcwj35xs67b@family.redbarn.org> <B1E3E640-42B5-452F-BB04-424B0AF10FE7@strayalpha.com> <20210404012903.qirmrspgkjjk6a64@family.redbarn.org> <2dd25093-005e-18f4-4773-f8b21d2e2049@wizmail.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <2dd25093-005e-18f4-4773-f8b21d2e2049@wizmail.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/K2i9T3K_YvvWLIlIm4N2PHpUKHU>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] UDP-Options: UDP has two ???maximums???
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: Wed, 07 Apr 2021 00:11:46 -0000

On Mon, Apr 05, 2021 at 09:11:25PM +0100, Jeremy Harris wrote:
> On 04/04/2021 02:29, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > TCPM [...]  chose TCPFO, which has since proved unworkable
> 
> Do you have some refs for the unworkable part?

well, i was thinking of this article when i penned the above:

https://squeeze.isobar.com/2019/04/11/the-sad-story-of-tcp-fast-open/

however, a web search turned up a +1 that i hadn't previously known of:

https://bridge.grumpy-troll.org/2013/12/tcp-fastopen-security/

noting, if i'd known google was also working on this, i'd've stayed home:

https://www.usenix.org/system/files/login/articles/126-metzger.pdf

(also noting, RFC 6013 was designed to fail fast through middleboxes.)

-- 
Paul Vixie

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email