IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] A review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-options-12

Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Mon, 14 June 2021 17:17 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.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 2EB413A2B6A for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jun 2021 10:17:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.317
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.317 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strayalpha.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 RTQNA0VqHmW1 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jun 2021 10:17:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server217-4.web-hosting.com (server217-4.web-hosting.com [198.54.116.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 929423A2B67 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jun 2021 10:17:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=To:References:Message-Id:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To: From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Sender: Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender :Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=5sZ3tACmNN6a1ZRExuA3WWQ5/Akbu8eVJSybiLK/Ips=; b=GlPKBwrVwiR/AeQ4f/6b06eLTV Og12IukX/0+fVvTIbfdLER4/oOodgDmP09DIQ7nonixzm8Wd+hwgn4ExuTY75m5XeSZ++bzBvDaTm j0/RH6hi8Utxi0Ab5yv238MinO0aH37JJd287Q3kxtdstLRxd/DSdCarTFEJU44V1c/ednaNdLdp2 Aza3Z3DWgGh9J8VZNbgeXy0eET9bK4bpq5erfCKaC2m3kEnkTtvEcaDEmOEmsgJZY/EoW+Qkvljiy TL2RnFprnYGKS9F39oQE4AzHjFY3h6cO0iFxtFSf0TrlIh2icwPh8dv0Jq6b0yGzgxD+7TFrg4OHe C1g1vBCQ==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-225-198.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.225.198]:52636 helo=smtpclient.apple) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1lsqD1-0014Mj-Au; Mon, 14 Jun 2021 13:17:16 -0400
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-A330213C-477D-4A50-BD4D-54BF8942EFFC"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACL_3VG9w3xsoOFqit_YHB5gTztWMQrcYo6km2cRtWmwGjHAjg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2021 10:17:10 -0700
Cc: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>, TSVWG <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <60AAD6ED-4506-4C06-BA2D-A918C8197CFB@strayalpha.com>
References: <CACL_3VG9w3xsoOFqit_YHB5gTztWMQrcYo6km2cRtWmwGjHAjg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18F72)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/h2AWNOzT1DlML3UE25ZeG_GFdKg>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] A review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-options-12
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, 14 Jun 2021 17:17:22 -0000


> On Jun 14, 2021, at 9:42 AM, C. M. Heard <heard@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> The proposal that I floated a few days ago in https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/N1fmoBxQ5iOL5X7o34oVSA8Ayvw/ would move all of the fragment data to the end of the packet, with UDP header and UDP options preceding. The very last option would be FRAG itself, and it would consume all trailing data.
> 
> Joe was displeased by replacing the length byte by a More Fragments flag and suggested instead using two Option Kind codepoints to distinguish terminal and non-terminal fragments. That would be fine with me and would not change the proposal in any fundamental way.

Yes, but we still need the fraglen field in the last frag too. 

See the format I posted this am. 

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email