IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> Mon, 16 March 2020 13:03 UTC

Return-Path: <chromatix99@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 034D23A07A1 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 06:03:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.848
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.848 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_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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=gmail.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 Cuo20ovxSQU7 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 06:03:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x22a.google.com (mail-lj1-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22a]) (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 A2CC73A079B for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 06:03:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x22a.google.com with SMTP id 19so18500840ljj.7 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 06:03:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=oYQRt3HoavMRERlp9SUa3R6o2zx/2Fa+Sg/3DwAb2vw=; b=ceH/cR7rUMNlnvCkVyUMn+QwLZg51JeaMIz9JYLj3Z84jNZSJQbwt5JsFyMGprXzou RUZYtk/k12LXL7y6Wa1i+ZN6MB1VP2g73refPcK5YiQsyfREQfqm0tATn8AdbJBrac6i C8wiKptmz266tXEJvbVDYIpnqt0Tx+CuT1SEjLtqHO8ibUSMoYHop5DsYZENDlWowhh9 TZzLfw3cfONKL3VPDdkpKhb/0JdD/hvdG6wjtzgeCF3+7huHss7O8RybZub2SRi1D7pb rXpQFmLfemkuECPqUCU3KKJ9f2x9PMEIBLUrMwisqGA7fNozeHKnmc3NWpzYvVBZJk2y dEjQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=oYQRt3HoavMRERlp9SUa3R6o2zx/2Fa+Sg/3DwAb2vw=; b=eVJ8A3cmkCXVqQJkcSB/QVw3o7ENNbZ4y+m9vPzOEl3BGc50iWaQzrYxcR/Nz02AWG eEdzVr2uZVmEW9l5afiZwOAy8j0/05v5tdEF6kAiBIQX2gqeKXOJovxmPZSV/6RGIFlp IrzLcKboOZMeD9XLkQYpe7R/VVxfl/HGqI1vDVXar2qqsqzxE9zrD95dBlv1mxHVPbx6 fxdRHXBYjlIIbsLoguFgDeDifH7neDGBImuD/rdmcUD3RLs1d+oNFEPFtmZRIgYHaE7w jQxv1eQlV7fDwqMwgyIu4KHC/DLhBrtUg1V6vFJ0InAvFFYBMK/T0Kwf0UiL3FjaeAFq ip2w==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ352kyayj3xSF5OeENBO53HuHKIbxQCqWitLce4V5zvu1U4/GSS uHrQN44v8EXO/On+HMYem0js/Txq
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vt/8MkjmlYbAp0tyIIBIcxLBSWu58HMOcsAhfL/Crh9cTo0jY2E1T1+jr9PgbdbR+z9Nb2rDQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:103b:: with SMTP id w27mr4037856ljm.245.1584363831852; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 06:03:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from jonathartonsmbp.lan (83-245-250-250-nat-p.elisa-mobile.fi. [83.245.250.250]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c20sm29486677lfb.60.2020.03.16.06.03.50 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 16 Mar 2020 06:03:50 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <25F001C3-083B-442E-8CB7-88EEF32E1974@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 15:03:49 +0200
Cc: Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <3E5BDCCB-1A92-4503-856B-E48DBD61239B@gmail.com>
References: <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D24327794936306F8925@MX307CL04.corp.emc.com> <2873ab79-19ad-0541-e3a4-d1d28dbc7ba0@bobbriscoe.net> <B6D58310-41E0-4172-B555-D28E7926A0B5@gmail.com> <3ee6e427-9dc9-e885-21a9-df9e35d99006@bobbriscoe.net> <C1696430-D2D2-48BB-AB17-EFB77EE474DE@gmail.com> <5d8f11f3-9def-14b1-4923-4eb02caf51eb@bobbriscoe.net> <50B14177-EB29-4273-839C-D22CCC47511E@gmail.com> <4f66ba3e-9eed-03cd-7f45-a1d7d10ec697@bobbriscoe.net> <FF777393-47B2-4B53-AD41-5883B2D67CC5@gmail.com> <264398ad-59eb-7cfd-0276-35ae0f0120a5@bobbriscoe.net> <44EB050C-C35C-47A0-BC78-3EEDB683B507@gmail.com> <c802dddc-8a55-47ea-9976-06771d39c952@bobbriscoe.net> <B3A657D0-EA9D-45EC-8003-21D158F83E06@gmx.de> <ea8fd9d7-82bc-7da0-a08d-31a2d46abe36@bobbriscoe.net> <D0036DCD-424F-46B0-819B-D9E60828CB50@gmx.de> <8acc44d5-d003-2a92-460e-81f31a26cc9b@bobbriscoe.net> <25F001C3-083B-442E-8CB7-88EEF32E1974@gmx.de>
To: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/P7K2PgZuQWejxvpaYKBnGV7iXCk>
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: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 13:03:55 -0000

> On 16 Mar, 2020, at 11:12 am, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> [SM] Well, realistically the ONLY viable solution is to design all tunnels to allow the de facto real-world internet MTU of 1500 and just make sure the tunnel itself uses jumbo-frame capable links to make sure fragmentation is not required. But honestly, in our current context I still wonder whether an operator failing to implement a non-fragmenting tunnel will ever deploy an ECN-enabled AQM...

I would assume that at least some tunnels traverse networks not under the administrative control of either endpoint.  There may be differences in competency between network administrations.

So I think it's safer to assume that the *physical* network tops out at 1500 bytes MTU, tunnels may therefore only support traffic with a smaller MTU, and that ECN AQMs may be deployed anywhere.

 - Jonathan Morton

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email