IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] RDMA Support by UDP FRAG Option

Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> Sun, 20 June 2021 17:52 UTC

Return-Path: <tom@herbertland.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 9A2023A08F8 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 20 Jun 2021 10:52:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.003
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 Tka1ElXJc4FQ for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 20 Jun 2021 10:52:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x532.google.com (mail-ed1-x532.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::532]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 825B43A08F6 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Sun, 20 Jun 2021 10:52:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x532.google.com with SMTP id i24so5138585edx.4 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Sun, 20 Jun 2021 10:52:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=K6fjM78KQeKW9DTKRv1I0/sCrsoHkIuPKky+uP4uaG4=; b=CZbqpso4MjvUttiVC0tQHuFSfqKgGQLr6AUDQbDm49MQMKX6aPw7VK33uPPJ+zNWg7 Ncla5mJZafAuxnaS+yrcBKer39N1thvZFJ0Sn5KZRu3nXw8R5VInqmZrn5c0lGcGpmx6 6sGNOGosl9nscWlpbMRHb2T4/OHXdLIsMoFE98QsxVfTnjBK4ngBrNry2CUPDtAoaxc/ PrZFP/udZog41Nohvq2R6iMpdyVPpwuEZ3svdZ+QqBWmvqzoACLzjZkA2tvxLjHitVD3 zsUv7IzwhDQs1B1Y6Asz9R4KXsK4wpPi1mSYCkUNWzJvxE1PIbqo2J5ZRuekw8Yaurzz jeXw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=K6fjM78KQeKW9DTKRv1I0/sCrsoHkIuPKky+uP4uaG4=; b=VLAnlYs+NLdkHKvSsvg7LClmoISvlMHxwOogKV5nfWhmNIsgrJBT6vJAK4pmISuEfk A2uad0SYMCZlmNPKumztYV4+MZrvriXDbVeLkL0N7ENBAtycY7v9tsEJFBX67RWs9wk7 yqhJdtuDdu+QF1A6HAa66gL6DGra9oITNnh+QsV0AtUTbKZbeDqONkf0/ia1TNvxRPOw iDt9kTQhbjmXslHGYYNcf3eYLj12e+DtraXwPXo+r5a78eldHHli5LOgGNiBs6NtJXHH 4HJv+uZ8ZClM9EfpYxCnJ2uEAKp1cQr3Isy3MWg9YeIKvJ6v61EX68I/6qqYgLrr9k6M gD9w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531eqwrWP1b3J6edB5CDB2Uv7GJdAL0Gk3PuP+NjREIuZkoNI/oU hB4KOyb6rx9OoMHcnKKNJwfd8K/BdYTyblRQbGpCyw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxzkBEvW1i8pKLroQOUVQbMV3KnAz2ICWq4Xctg9T5EHMJeWsy72Kv26+cfwLtMmUXM6mDLvQnJhAEk1zAqVUg=
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:d818:: with SMTP id v24mr16764292edq.22.1624211519362; Sun, 20 Jun 2021 10:51:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CACL_3VEyLdQZ-3hvzXxyA8ehtWs2hXESZ2OqyAx+BeSg85+-cA@mail.gmail.com> <CACL_3VFE4TjKvmkfZjvNpWo6vVfKjz5w85=Q+yqnYZKcwbYLmQ@mail.gmail.com> <63FFC34B-2179-47F1-B325-21CAC3D1543A@strayalpha.com> <CACL_3VHTfxWaBj7TFEmBXBqovrrAj7XuFEZFUag_iBHr3Hx09g@mail.gmail.com> <0EBFC9B0-591A-4860-B327-6E617B83F4D1@strayalpha.com> <CALx6S34pT81TbfQDk2vKF8wBrXL312As79K=rEzUQ3Lmg7UvpA@mail.gmail.com> <7C51D926-9DBB-41F5-93B2-10F716F672B1@strayalpha.com> <CALx6S37uN8TsXQZ3cv5jmxwxSyBRjK=-GQ_MsWxPWSs21XoGHw@mail.gmail.com> <CACL_3VEx7+VnLz7OLdXyhZU41e+-oBz3dc8JdMV_7pLMfic6=w@mail.gmail.com> <fcc8762f-c042-7999-d2e4-f28384950a19@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <CALx6S36sWGcZmFpAhF4DfOMyf6Z0w5F9bemNfeM1yWV-r0M+BA@mail.gmail.com> <8af3abf9-943f-13c1-e239-5efca27cf68c@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <CACL_3VHdyLAmzMbWsTVfJD+4tTzsMvcTzKS1B1CAdZ3k5U957g@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S34DUrUBYd94LPPg4Hgh0FnZYZjZ4eKEYuaxb-7zbzb=pQ@mail.gmail.com> <F2C7D790-4037-4D41-B30D-0F66AF084635@strayalpha.com> <CALx6S37VN_GyyQ7E_rnNCOG2tPS5wVR9jdGMjgy0aaAFYT7anQ@mail.gmail.com> <C9BB95CC-1A12-48B6-9E90-8ED56EF40F27@strayalpha.com> <CALx6S36FK7NVzMTdh+aUSpBdXrfT5C=KsAwoVBR8gU06E0TW5g@mail.gmail.com> <EDFA3673-E833-48F7-87B5-2F806EEDAA0E@strayalpha.com> <CALx6S37+c6-Q0ySO8beaAkzd_nCMh5CYO0HgWnApZcwE6gjZbw@mail.gmail.com> <23E50AA1-2FF7-4196-9B33-507F35C0F3B3@strayalpha.com>
In-Reply-To: <23E50AA1-2FF7-4196-9B33-507F35C0F3B3@strayalpha.com>
From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2021 10:51:48 -0700
Message-ID: <CALx6S35kND3hCPsXLzisbq7XjqsLMFWm_=9EotuagTe46xOhZA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
Cc: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>, TSVWG <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/KlLZdJzvrMe1Gd6QDpnC0BYdDK8>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] RDMA Support by UDP FRAG Option
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, 20 Jun 2021 17:52:08 -0000

On Sun, Jun 20, 2021 at 10:01 AM Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> wrote:
>
>
> > On Jun 20, 2021, at 9:41 AM, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 19, 2021 at 9:57 PM Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> wrote:
> >> ...
> >> Bugs are bugs.
> >>
> >
> > Joe,
> >
> > All of this grandstanding and Linux bashing aside, technical issues
> > concerning UDP options are being raised that may be detrimental to the
> > running implementation or deployability of the protocol. I believe
> > these issues warrant a better answer than just calling them
> > implementation bugs and otherwise ignoring them.
>
> The only technical issue shown so far is in the *assumptions* about UDP, not in UDP itself.
>
> If there is a technical issue *in UDP*, then prove it.

Nope, that's not how it works. As an author of the draft the impetus
is on you to demonstrate the robustness of the protocol and
feasibility of implementation and deployment. As I don't believe
further discussion on this would be productive, I'll defer to the WG
as to whether the authors have sufficiently addressed comments made on
the list.

Tom

>
> Joe

v2.39.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status