IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] Alternative version of the UDP FRAG option

Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Wed, 20 March 2019 14:25 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 740811275E9 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:25:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.22
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.22 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] 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 nBpUf-Buu5rp for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:25:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server217-3.web-hosting.com (server217-3.web-hosting.com [198.54.115.226]) (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 1B256126D00 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:25:11 -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-Type:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding: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=IHjNXHf15cC0Jd4g76oxImAXLsnCYo7Mg8AKUOxX38M=; b=V17TlH1hCTmcbyEoCjNFH0sQq ny5kUjqEmGbkJVK6cB/gPLsQKmF0m2GLNTZ+ohLemEkPgrwjfUmifVxhfHlk/RegivX3QYwcb61F2 HGHdqfo3guGhnU51pyWuO079O9T9ZEBc+NtgUa/9FKIMYIFzfEUtoIWyLiV584RmrsX3FlvmFbEra P+uIbI/C2EnTdgLV6OnP9hG1X82Gp+kFDvWqa5478193CeaMRhqWvNuW+Z0B7FhVRdnJ5+uLVMs9E Gl/lJWQBBFDx3V1Cc+FCV7nqsOB3R665w0dnvyVHowmmMyBGo86HXt0nrlLZoBrfYKlfiaKYVVp1L Z/vYu4Yow==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-240-132.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.240.132]:50102 helo=[192.168.1.77]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1h6c9U-003GEJ-3n; Wed, 20 Mar 2019 10:25:08 -0400
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_176022DB-4844-43C6-8357-5154BE5AF7EB"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S36CttWC88SvA5-87pirGer7EQYD_TGhpHFCTQJS2sPZ2A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:25:07 -0700
Cc: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>, tsvwg <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <0E3B3097-0279-4425-8278-0579DD446D44@strayalpha.com>
References: <CACL_3VE1=0OORUuOKg9GjcdVuhBNTkWhymE7PAs5WYO0ZR0DWQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S37y_AbESyX5PcCSu7NEr-uPVrPXksEeAx5aSNAyqshL6Q@mail.gmail.com> <CACL_3VFJTxM3s-GLOTz9xmkNk1uOQoCmAGApbAf1ZgbH3Opptw@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S36aWKHFXO=Zx8W-wFqqC5-Oueb3j-b9evm-yKpfguVQuw@mail.gmail.com> <5C8FBBED.7000805@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <CALx6S34FKNJ_6Ep659L3t_Kf4bnEKZ5LTjXo-zWz4PrveU_UVA@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S37MsCmOOsn0bnHoTwJkN7Khfm03z__W4hhy7c29XuvQHw@mail.gmail.com> <5C8FDEED.8010701@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <CALx6S36fQcRdgvCG3XS78EecFjdb36D22iBzovXcODH_W+BHbg@mail.gmail.com> <5C90A81A.8050409@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <CALx6S36CttWC88SvA5-87pirGer7EQYD_TGhpHFCTQJS2sPZ2A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
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/v6Hn_0rGwVZ-T0bq3HFJzuxAYOQ>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Alternative version of the 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: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 14:25:13 -0000


> On Mar 19, 2019, at 1:37 PM, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> wrote:
> 
> Gorry,
> 
> Suppose we create a compression option whereby UDP payload is compressed and decompressed at the receiver.

See the rules in Section 7 - which are there specifically to avoid this sort of tangle.

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email