IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Geoff/queue-closed: 56%

Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> Wed, 20 March 2024 05:36 UTC

Return-Path: <marka@isc.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 DD4CAC17C8A5 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:36:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.107 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isc.org header.b="mfaOxDKb"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isc.org header.b="DWWpqUuR"
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rBu3O9SZvkSQ for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:36:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.pao1.isc.org (mx.pao1.isc.org [149.20.2.50]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13D73C15109C for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:36:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zimbrang.isc.org (zimbrang.isc.org [149.20.2.31]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx.pao1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B08D3AB1C2; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 05:36:15 +0000 (UTC)
ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 mx.pao1.isc.org 7B08D3AB1C2
Authentication-Results: mx.pao1.isc.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=149.20.2.31
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=isc.org; s=ostpay; t=1710912975; cv=none; b=PHtUZilRxDGCGguo3oqTFzHgvcLUN0taYrFVrnkWkWTFNJrG98KCU2Kk6o3fEd7kg6Wh00Ma/ek/7xUuL2dDNe9xImuBIg4o5PzoS2ZolerO4KGi0PuBJQb+aSJtj6j9EecmvUkshwJvE3iL/FSovN07Ftwq62lm955E9Fzi/G8=
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=isc.org; s=ostpay; t=1710912975; c=relaxed/relaxed; bh=Y1iQtXVyg14qGmgswz9+aee4AzLGfS/W6ze/To+MX98=; h=DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature:Mime-Version:Subject:From:Date: Message-Id:To; b=ilFqq2YeErQviLlE29cIDIa+iKVAiMZWhse/n4Vf5YOmk+sgzhvg9rlG3VdRNS5Z3ZLVR51XcSzgUg43f8GJXKGLPwJAL/xSEze+dgB42ex+ThYJ9wzWKZu6hI4S4Y1JxDG+i8rVDNTHDcN7OkeUFwzOefOUDol49F6K5Ipqv1A=
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.pao1.isc.org
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 mx.pao1.isc.org 7B08D3AB1C2
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=isc.org; s=ostpay; t=1710912975; bh=ft/ufblTWJBd7bZnjUpeqDlvL5W0zp2GBLdkfXrunBk=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=mfaOxDKboQlsdnzGeRsVg58orTXusJcO30b+6gDwJV+kNOo8TjEHRVOATWd4Z91mq /9vHsV83i+B86hAgWDbtyTpfLs5o702qZk8cvPGTEodT3TBmoZu70WK0lwFV3OgbyE U0z3ieppbUOKWZlyuCd8MiqrxtmoE1FufOoTqmns=
Received: from zimbrang.isc.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zimbrang.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7783D10000D6; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 05:36:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zimbrang.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5583610000E3; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 05:36:15 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 zimbrang.isc.org 5583610000E3
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isc.org; s=05DFB016-56A2-11EB-AEC0-15368D323330; t=1710912975; bh=Y1iQtXVyg14qGmgswz9+aee4AzLGfS/W6ze/To+MX98=; h=Mime-Version:From:Date:Message-Id:To; b=DWWpqUuR2TgMMDb785rl2CI0e6FF9wfSBoHaGkzBjTZRQTMj0IoK6Tcw0hCYqGbCP tYkLR3wrBGU2oJKagvVrIhJsb406Sbz32RDEGfi4cQAO2NKoufVlysMuR+VAuMBHDn nkbYvv1VXh/2LWCxKwsHe1EPm8DiME0rsT8SnxHM=
Received: from zimbrang.isc.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbrang.isc.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10026) with ESMTP id N6x9Obybfd7Q; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 05:36:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (n49-187-18-238.bla1.nsw.optusnet.com.au [49.187.18.238]) by zimbrang.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8F3E010000D6; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 05:36:14 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.700.6.1.1\))
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
In-Reply-To: <ZfplwNJGdpl05bZO@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 16:36:01 +1100
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org, gih@apnic.net
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <EF78559D-7879-4C0D-A47B-08AB279FD40B@isc.org>
References: <ZfplwNJGdpl05bZO@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
To: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.700.6.1.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/if3mAYRpZZY6YuKyOCSmTz8Td5o>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Geoff/queue-closed: 56%
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 05:36:19 -0000

There is also PMTUD failures which is why IPV6_USE_MIN_MTU was designed to avoid triggering PMTUD.
Also setting MSS to 1280-headers when making a TCP connection that is expected to be short lived
helps.  Anycast and PMTUD doesn’t work (well).  The only reason TCP appears to work is routers
rewriting MSS when going from larger to smaller link MTUs.  Additionally there is zero pressure to
fix brokenness why IPv4 co-exists.  DNS timeouts are small and happy eyeballs has always been part
of how DNS servers work.  They wait sub seconds before moving onto a different address. IPv6 mostly
is exposing broken configurations and they get fixed. 

> On 20 Mar 2024, at 15:27, Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> wrote:
> 
> Has anyone tried to at least to try to determine the causes of the 56% fragmentation failures ?
> Aka: do we know that there are not single relevant causes that actually could be addressed ?
> 
> I fail to belive upfront that there are 10,000 individual issues, none happening in more than 0.0056% of the
> instances.
> 
> Cheers
>    Toerless
> 
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742              INTERNET: marka@isc.org

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email