[v6ops] Re: [tsvwg] Carrying large DNS packets over UDP in IPv6 networks

Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com> Mon, 17 June 2024 10:28 UTC

Return-Path: <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com>
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 2843DC15152B; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 03:28:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, 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 (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 Tg3WKwlzqGOT; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 03:28:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x435.google.com (mail-pf1-x435.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::435]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 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 51D61C1DA1FC; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 03:28:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x435.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-7046e87e9afso3268180b3a.0; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 03:28:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1718620106; x=1719224906; darn=ietf.org; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=qijXF9HsqGaKeLYveFJ7Hz+Nw8TYwLUjhe01IBQ3PVg=; b=ZCseVO/+VbV/VbhkmTblDjGtYxxsVwgB/PXPcxfpKYI8GJpnFUuUSE/bjeIpgobpVR kcgxEewF3YjY7kUDbQ4jcX+7I8Nzi9uQxtv1QCTCDxd50qtDDBlD6W5NfmviTNZg57H6 oT/Fyjp0GGPYfTC9i2Alfeya7wQRzhV33dfVMqQc0AGI7F221/ti3IQPsq70W8Q+1uXS KCkuqvkjK6MFlDhtlYB6xgbDpMOVTjh2Rl4Nbhm/K4P9q1VABhCuQX5cOKdm/RI+sSVS plDWwBWt4g45vLBATTjzy2Ph5RDMiid/KVDnj4a94WD5a4UiPvmm+DUdZSr7EG6jSw2Y LM+g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1718620106; x=1719224906; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=qijXF9HsqGaKeLYveFJ7Hz+Nw8TYwLUjhe01IBQ3PVg=; b=GmxGWI76+QdDVUGiavYwfvbEYcQauKe3kHo5x2M+J2ffGtpbsv+1Rc+n7oektxfPhf X9YerLCpZSNJnUdN1fX81FiCsFqPWbt9G2j5NqX9Cec6HErqrUNkSGKx16StP5CP2UAs gNE+DczcKPuT2nchGSDtFC7yROs86bbBBGA4DwSDhafwPGDwdf1Gw97apaHHyOBeJ10E eRbc32LefnmREidgLf5GlcQmBDGQXWvO4nTeYAIbQdgtFsDItYkkAACi0/eOoFdtYGkk dDI9ELxoNXiuVYbyWPXe5PYeSUNWy5dA3WfolWgPl6VcU28QSQaCxxozQV95SdAHZGxo nqdg==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXh/tf9vVZPbpPCGe2RqaN05eU06M4fERv4jsP3hGLfr4kMq9Ha/yTeteKBU6tyx3gLFX9MPgF4kaYnW3nPHylWpF/bSY6yunHoglaAWWw=
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyXJJYb2ReVEPxaOZiXCkyVrYmw731il7BkifF/TFqDfwXIULay WcJPjj0cweKDAPqi3XLYCxOgb3ZZMWsGryYaqYhpVz5eHQaKDkWn
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFNhuOwY/ZMf22oHX4X7z6afZ4SVUJaamMS3IpilktpdtgJRZFVgjD9LbJ8rRjm/iOJmalaYQ==
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:9a41:0:b0:6f8:b260:ae9b with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-705d71b3103mr7742489b3a.27.1718620106212; Mon, 17 Jun 2024 03:28:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2401:4900:1cd1:edb7:5190:fda5:7812:6889]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 41be03b00d2f7-6fee41663d2sm6248476a12.92.2024.06.17.03.28.24 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 17 Jun 2024 03:28:25 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.700.6\))
From: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACL_3VHkbVeno3i+T6saWCoVQnvmgvwxAWG34YK9EoHBubmPHw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 06:28:12 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <67F28381-A276-44F9-80D6-42973AB08095@gmail.com>
References: <E35DC12F-D1CE-4AE5-B155-612C639A348B@gmail.com> <DU2PR02MB10160CCA998D5A86B9F11F2C388C22@DU2PR02MB10160.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com> <CACL_3VGzQfn9Gp+Wvx6HDZt=Gbyurirgt8Sa3qah7TpNgLiQug@mail.gmail.com> <BAEBA468-9B3E-41ED-B609-1D0A9D4A0F6E@gmail.com> <Zm81hsg9-O6A3GCQ@Space.Net> <fd1db63a-b735-4906-9416-80a118be15dc@gmail.com> <CACL_3VHkbVeno3i+T6saWCoVQnvmgvwxAWG34YK9EoHBubmPHw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.700.6)
Message-ID-Hash: FPAZJ33CWPPWRG34OWCVRWYWJWKVWYMW
X-Message-ID-Hash: FPAZJ33CWPPWRG34OWCVRWYWJWKVWYMW
X-MailFrom: suresh.krishnan@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-v6ops.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [v6ops] Re: [tsvwg] Carrying large DNS packets over UDP in IPv6 networks
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/uljSGtPNMD5wdAb3oqR85iYto2w>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:v6ops-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:v6ops-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:v6ops-leave@ietf.org>

Hi Mike,

> On Jun 16, 2024, at 7:30 PM, C. M. Heard <heard@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Jun 16, 2024 at 1:03 PM Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> > I don't think a v6ops document should venture into DNS transport
> > recommendations - especially as the question "TCP or QUIC" is, basically,
> > independent of the underlying IP protocol (IPv4 fragments are not safe
> > from eaten by intermediate grue).
> 
>  From Geoff's observations, I'm not sure that's true - that is, the best practice for DNS/IPv4 probably differs from the best practice for DNS/IPv6.
> 
> That is correct, and one can see the evidence not just in Geoff's excellent presentation at IETF 119 (https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/119/materials/slides-119-v6ops-operational-issues-00.pdf for those who missed it) but in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation#name-on-path-fragmentation-on-ip
> 
> Also, whether the final document(s) come out of v6ops or dnsop (or even tsvwg) is secondary to whether they say the right things. Perhaps we could ask the various WG chairs to coordinate?
> 
> Excellent idea; it might help to push draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation out the door.

Looking at the datatracker, I think that document might be ready to go out of the soon since the IESG evaluation is done and the positions indicate that the document is ready to move forward.

Regards
Suresh