Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers - Load Balancer

[Tom Herbert <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 2:08 AM Vasilenko Eduard
<[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Hi Fernando,
> Hence again, following the logic of this draft (the level of detalization that you have given to 5.1) - may be you need additional section 5.1.x: Load Balancer have to look into TCP/UDP ports. Moreover, it could not trust "Flow label" - it is not reliable practice for LB.

Eduard,

What exactly does "not reliable practice for LB" mean.? If this means
that the flow label might change during the flow's lifetime then I
will point out that UDP is equally unreliable for that reason (i.e.
the UDP ports for a QUIC connection can change during the connection's
lifetime). For that matter, a TCP header might be encrypted or in an
encapsulation that the LB doesn't understand so the LB can't access
the TCP ports at all-- in the this case the flow label is actually
more reliable than TCP since it's never encrypted and is purposely
designed to be consumed by intermediate nodes without the need for
expensive DPI.

Tom
> Or alternatively you could say something about LB in section 5.1.2, but because it is a little special case - may be better to have separate 5.1.x
>
> Eduard
> -----Original Message-----
> From: v6ops [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Fernando Gont
> Sent: 26 июля 2020 г. 8:46
> To: IPv6 Operations <[e-mail]>
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-04.txt)
>
> Folks,
>
> We have posted a rev of our IETF I-D "Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers".
>
> The I-D is available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-04.txt
>
> Your feedback will be appreciated.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Cheers,
> Fernando
>
>
>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: New Version Notification for
> draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-04.txt
> Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2020 22:28:50 -0700
> From: [e-mail]
> To: Fernando Gont <[e-mail]>, Gert Doering <[e-mail]>, Geoff Huston <[e-mail]>, Warren Kumari <[e-mail]>, Nick Hilliard <[e-mail]>
>
>
> A new version of I-D, draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-04.txt
> has been successfully submitted by Fernando Gont and posted to the IETF repository.
>
> Name:           draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops
> Revision:       04
> Title:          Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers
> Document date:  2020-07-25
> Group:          Individual Submission
> Pages:          15
> URL:
> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-04.txt
> Status:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops/
> Htmlized:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-04
> Htmlized:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops
> Diff:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-04
>
> Abstract:
>     This document summarizes the security and operational implications of
>     IPv6 extension headers, and attempts to analyze reasons why packets
>     with IPv6 extension headers may be dropped in the public Internet.
>
>
>
>
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>
> The IETF Secretariat
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops