[tsvwg] UDP Options ID

Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk> Thu, 09 July 2020 13:00 UTC

Return-Path: <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
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 5FE9D3A0940 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 06:00:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 qQlJ1UX8a70w for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 05:59:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk (pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk [137.50.19.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10BBE3A08E1 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 05:59:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from GF-MacBook-Pro.lan (fgrpf.plus.com [212.159.18.54]) by pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BD59E1B001BF; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 13:59:54 +0100 (BST)
References: <c41953d85d54ab0f38b6b3b6eb16572d@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
To: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
Cc: "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
From: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <c41953d85d54ab0f38b6b3b6eb16572d@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <20a4696a-2af1-af83-abb5-90d923f4acbd@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 13:59:54 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <c41953d85d54ab0f38b6b3b6eb16572d@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/hwwrZeTVEE8E3TM9edtvfIUh2gg>
Subject: [tsvwg] UDP Options ID
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: Thu, 09 Jul 2020 13:00:01 -0000

Joe,

Is it possible to make a new revision of the UDP-O ID, at least to 
capture two points that were raised in the last petriod about:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-options-08

(1) In Section 5.1:

Following Raffaele Zullo's comment on the OCS. The text currently says:

"OCS is calculated by computing the Internet checksum over the
surplus area."

- However, to allow this to work through NAPT and other middleboxes, 
this also requires the UDP Options length (i.e. IP Payload length minus 
UDP Length) to be included in this computation.

(2) The idea to remove the LITE option from the spec was discussed
at IETF-106, as a major simplification to the spec. that might also
align with initial implementation work.

Gorry

- https://tools.ietf.org/wg/tsvwg/minutes?item=minutes-106-tsvwg-04.html