Re: [tsvwg] RDMA Support by UDP FRAG Option

[Gorry Fairhurst <[e-mail]>]

On 17/06/2021 18:30, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 7:41 AM Gorry Fairhurst <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> I'd personally perfer the simpler formats - unless someone tells me that
>> coping with message buffers is made much easier by any more fiddlesome
>> (re)ordering of bytes.
>>
>> When teh dust has settled, I expect we should see an updated
>> fragmentation text.  I suspect we should consider the final format for
>> suitability for offload (perhaps Tom Herbert would look?) and for ease
>> of processing in message nbuffere (Tom Jones offered to look).
> Gorry,
>
> Please look at draft-herbert-udp-space-hdr-01 for my proposal as to
> how the UDP surplus space should be formatted. If there is interest, I
> could update draft to include considerations for UDP options
> fragmentation and reassembly offload as well as header/data split
> which is needed for zero-copy receive (i.e. packet headers are DMA'ed
> into one set of buffers to be processed by the stack, payload is
> DMA'ed to another set of buffers to be processed by the application).
>
> Tom

Thanks, I saw that a while ago, thanks for reminding people.

I think it would be good for the WG to focus on how to finish 
draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-options, but I do seem some opportunities to use 
some of these ideas for making the fragment header - because that also 
places all data in the "option".

Gorry

>> Gorry
>>