IETF Logo Mail Archive

[tsvwg] Re: [v6ops] Carrying large DNS packets over UDP in IPv6 networks

Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com> Mon, 17 June 2024 10:26 UTC

Return-Path: <suresh.krishnan@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 DD8D7C151092; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 03:26:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.109 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_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] 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 ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0IP1z26pBcky; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 03:26:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x62e.google.com (mail-pl1-x62e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62e]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D26DFC14CE5D; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 03:26:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x62e.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1f6fabe9da3so34889585ad.0; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 03:26:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1718619980; x=1719224780; darn=ietf.org; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=ygUVGKzQaptoDAuzPNHcn+iD1DgMO30hyNMHA6QrkO0=; b=j+dwZZqRT/xzwq7YukEvYUbfzHiszlwF1h0b39X6EexR9zvBpKlc7eWeeGvBJtNvZc sep2uNS0sr6Hx9np0Lw8A5qvnjhwJYiIVdB4Lm7+TuidUz/Xylshe5AJdHytpT758VKI ToKDb4eB9CS1VsgCajM/i0Qk+4t2DnOU9fLV/HjsiDJuDriMUHV+rf8du9sHYxKYmgqi bBwIo8TBm58jNRA9tzLimbQYHLANrGZXMwus8E1mLP3vHMoxI2kaTIlpVvx2dMz5acHf 68wR1c2kWwxWm2qRebg0Eivq3GGI8Jdzvg9sjhTnyEyA8GZxzvZtlAm3+qzuUYefvhnm 5Kew==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1718619980; x=1719224780; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ygUVGKzQaptoDAuzPNHcn+iD1DgMO30hyNMHA6QrkO0=; b=G7sXBhauGS8ch649IQflKLJMDQl6OUDcmaNgkDl2OXuB83Gk0ma5GqV5gEBo0LM/8H 9moeUJaJfJjbY/CERnRDg6X4PKAsi0KAR4S3fRGmVoZVdPHnBZA2IyaEAJOlm4lkPbU3 H8z6OJAOF4mielQOincPKD1RaLDt/2KquNvySVVj8n3/dDF+FnZjzpsr5hpdVrurUroG xKvG6CIDCg04Q8hlvNevLhduF2I9VwDQhivrI9gImBqV5H+LYQqn+RN/K+/VCNN2IHA3 9cPq4yI6DCZvHjVKD3mPYX35TKYwShwM3vI9woSSStGYdVFHCn8VZjxoHRHXAmqXDb7D R6BQ==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCW/a/25OSwkGR+lLpXNsoEw39iPMyTTCnV7B7vgGvWcuewXGJOQTwZAkW2TnzDJ/l4oPY2AzY7ZsPajUZASi5YdPM4HGv3UnswbP0W5SAU=
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxlC2s/YDwwYQrdXJz/PJKBHCmmiFgVZky5DTLHlROdWwOv/rK4 WhzOz9QGd7qQaVQXEPkOPI0KFSvsRiUW4m+yAwYeGNqPXS3jlrE/
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IH1roRE7W9AHtRDriTSell9Od4pxB2OutyUoya9GcPxz5Cuh+n34Vi9hYAAmFKN2QdHkA3qlA==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:ce89:b0:1f7:13db:527b with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1f8625c3579mr118646615ad.7.1718619979815; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 03:26:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2401:4900:1cd1:edb7:5190:fda5:7812:6889]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d9443c01a7336-1f855f32334sm76574115ad.259.2024.06.17.03.26.17 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 17 Jun 2024 03:26:19 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.700.6\))
From: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <fd1db63a-b735-4906-9416-80a118be15dc@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 06:26:06 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <3AC7C616-61A8-4EBA-9C78-6BF724B4405E@gmail.com>
References: <E35DC12F-D1CE-4AE5-B155-612C639A348B@gmail.com> <DU2PR02MB10160CCA998D5A86B9F11F2C388C22@DU2PR02MB10160.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com> <CACL_3VGzQfn9Gp+Wvx6HDZt=Gbyurirgt8Sa3qah7TpNgLiQug@mail.gmail.com> <BAEBA468-9B3E-41ED-B609-1D0A9D4A0F6E@gmail.com> <Zm81hsg9-O6A3GCQ@Space.Net> <fd1db63a-b735-4906-9416-80a118be15dc@gmail.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.700.6)
Message-ID-Hash: LEDYGAQ6UNXY5DDWGUVOVCK7VCUYRFLX
X-Message-ID-Hash: LEDYGAQ6UNXY5DDWGUVOVCK7VCUYRFLX
X-MailFrom: suresh.krishnan@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tsvwg.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>, "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [tsvwg] Re: [v6ops] Carrying large DNS packets over UDP in IPv6 networks
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/gtXvdJplDXHErenuSUuBV1ati9A>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:tsvwg-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:tsvwg-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:tsvwg-leave@ietf.org>

> On Jun 16, 2024, at 4:03 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Gert,
> 
> On 17-Jun-24 06:57, Gert Doering wrote:
>> Hi,
>> On Sun, Jun 16, 2024 at 09:07:44AM -0700, Bob Hinden wrote:
>>> This document is aligned with the recommendation in [I-D.ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation], but focuses on DNS over IPv6, and also recommends and provides additional details on running DNS over TCP or QUIC.
>> I don't think a v6ops document should venture into DNS transport
>> recommendations - especially as the question "TCP or QUIC" is, basically,
>> independent of the underlying IP protocol (IPv4 fragments are not safe
>> from eaten by intermediate grue).
> 
> From Geoff's observations, I'm not sure that's true - that is, the best practice for DNS/IPv4 probably differs from the best practice for DNS/IPv6.

Totally agree Brian. I think this a very important difference due to the lack of in-network fragmentation in IPv6 and difficulties in discerning Path MTU.

> 
> Also, whether the final document(s) come out of v6ops or dnsop (or even tsvwg) is secondary to whether they say the right things. Perhaps we could ask the various WG chairs to coordinate?

+1.

Regards
Suresh

v2.35.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status