IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] IPv6 fragmentation experience

Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> Fri, 23 March 2018 10:21 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD1F612D864 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 03:21:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, 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 5y_XU4T3xUgg for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 03:21:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from accordion.employees.org (accordion.employees.org [198.137.202.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC16B126BF0 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 03:21:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from h.hanazo.no (unknown [173.38.220.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by accordion.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8E6172D4FF7; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:21:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by h.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EC9420261DB13; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:20:49 +0000 (GMT)
From: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
Message-Id: <53B81EAD-6AB9-4A2C-BEBC-2B80A10533BF@employees.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_ED5446F6-265D-4179-A78D-9776975A8783"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\))
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:20:48 +0000
In-Reply-To: <0519C8D2-BD94-45E5-B26A-CD5B96A8A27B@strayalpha.com>
Cc: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>, "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>
To: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
References: <84080e87-9ec6-a676-b535-088470e43923@asgard.org> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1803201208550.20609@uplift.swm.pp.se> <561690FD-9016-4EB0-B03C-CE2BFE4BE7A0@employees.org> <7456C389-0CB0-4E9D-8622-E3461FAA4375@steffann.nl> <5F05318A-0B2D-4B6F-8442-6A0C7E9581EF@gmail.com> <6cc086ed-f6b4-60a9-d181-1e3a6a41c563@strayalpha.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1803210918100.20609@uplift.swm.pp.se> <92BFD600-9948-4E2C-80A1-F5F2BD320A31@strayalpha.com> <20180321200444.GX89741@Space.Net> <0c57a669-7cad-e554-b637-a6d86e0e7a67@strayalpha.com> <20180322102010.GE89741@Space.Net> <CAFU7BAQU9NNL=B7YjdNxDH9fjv3cFk=LUsz-eG0Rxe2gA6X+8g@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S36WA0hV5oa1Ab7D6nH=1B+SGRA=JVJgdYWRH7OH8wB_JQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAFU7BATfu2remSQTiLGpUDLhp020xFLLQdDBT-3iKsNhBmw+wg@mail.gmail.com> <133d0300-7d11-133d-dec1-07aa7546f3df@strayalpha.com> <6265ABC4-73D9-4A6B-BA52-71F26483AAE7@employees.org> <0519C8D2-BD94-45E5-B26A-CD5B96A8A27B@strayalpha.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/BLRm5OU501SjZ0BApS9I_FxJ3cE>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] IPv6 fragmentation experience
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:21:10 -0000

Joe,

>> It seems you are in denial about the consequences for IPv4 with ever increasing address sharing.
> 
> You are willing to pay money to be lied to. I am not

I am the one taking your money and implementing it, and trying not to lie to you in the process.

I have also written some of the specs in this space. I can guarantee you that A+P has a higher fragment drop probability than an 1:1 IPv4 Internet. Given that we do not have that luxury, the resulting decaying IPv4 Internet is what we have to live with. We've told you to move to IPv6 for quite a while now.

And if you are upset about fragments having an increasing drop probability, then please don't try to put anything but 6 or 17 in that protocol field.

The relevant path of the IPv4 forwarding path I've implemented is here:
https://git.fd.io/vpp/tree/src/vnet/map/ip4_map.c#n195

Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email