Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers - Load Balancer
Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com> Mon, 27 July 2020 09:47 UTC
Return-Path: <markzzzsmith@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 498CC3A180E; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 02:47:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.597
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.597 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, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, HK_RANDOM_FROM=0.999, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 WfBE_VnBeyUB; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 02:47:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi1-x243.google.com (mail-oi1-x243.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F9B63A1811; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 02:47:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi1-x243.google.com with SMTP id w17so13820726oie.6; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 02:47:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ACBfLgWXMUkuJNT9QAnvoFfdYUCHQ6ryJYnXkUVdDxo=; b=uTql68T0RVaJM7Ics8NqpVCV/C5EpZrDC8dCrRUFrB5bG6TccEXGrx+MZpHaOFZ370 D0NyKEd7RjrtA/gNGp+oqUIFKMDX7tKqoFLC2EFydzthlF+1N1Qn/yrPWDx5VX9/wS43 11kLFPcuqve6DBf7/R7xcajpNVHt5wYStf+bvvSfA9o/A0n8sUL5jwHz2SA2l5fluJDY XODUu7EnQzI0WcAjRXOa5x9nvZCksSpgJWw3cKQCZdQ7vUdz7aVRfzlUjBgyphCXVjFA mxPUIuwEA4jWQ4cXbebHJXWfH6UWFOJ1bS2z64ajoUPv2998iTBDAa961bq9dVZm9kHI NzOA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ACBfLgWXMUkuJNT9QAnvoFfdYUCHQ6ryJYnXkUVdDxo=; b=EuxwihN6CZms/Nl7RqtAStueXBKJiEDTyaO3p+PEkEgpz/77COnqvqq7mnaQuKLvPv LCJRO2QXhKpjNuWFwgJF3iZiWVPk8v5nKPT73B8MeZ5eu+zmj6UUREQw8dRlO5Lj/vnI NzP/DJbmSC+9SF1VK636F2F9bBNSGjwdEQhnPu7odz3N/XyNoqdb9aSdrYpfwEZZXWTB PvFzmBrI1WM6/SheiIjt32y298P1qvzHCDAsFOEADWmVdeBXB4mV3HZ0EZ3SWj9AUF2p eMpnlDkXwVepw4W6VQgTkwhhsYoaLxAd+3xbSSwZ2HJC1DY7z5haNXic0U6PW98Z2YWT YmcA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530Z9+XgBGFJ0BI1D3FMe5lBv9gHCQgM/8bg94PVad+p1Em16KSt Rh5ya5nS1qADB0PmQCEWZ+v3GPjNWsfgnBy1/3w=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxWOo8w5zZJawmSV2bGc0jVh83lS2tqSt6IIjpWXAph9CcEhlH+EtMKZwgPtXREfyIpJn9nC5uEiIBEs+Wniz8=
X-Received: by 2002:aca:50d5:: with SMTP id e204mr17917005oib.60.1595843231815; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 02:47:11 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <b380408712364589a45ab9f39ab6f764@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <b380408712364589a45ab9f39ab6f764@huawei.com>
From: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 19:47:01 +1000
Message-ID: <CAO42Z2y1K7AM1-Ene_-RqWGOZ8ObgNfKyhu4PV+BUdAG8xaoKA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com>
Cc: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>, "draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops@ietf.org" <draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f31e3a05ab69346e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/x3qkz_STNZiTCs1SdK2dpFjB9Fg>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers - Load Balancer
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 09:47:14 -0000
Hi, If load balancers are going to be discussed, it also needs to be pointed out that they don't follow the definition of unicast addresses. A unicast address is to uniquely identify a single node. Load balancers share a single unicast address between multiple nodes, contradictory to the unique and single node identification purpose of unicast addresses. That is why they need to do non-RFC compliant things like digging into transport layer headers to work with unicast protocols like UDP, TCP and ICMP, trying to make them work across a fleet of nodes sharing a single unicast address. An anycast address, combined with a multi-path transport layer protocol is the way to do service load balancing in an RFC compliant way. See Section 5.7.7 of this draft for how. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-smith-6man-form-func-anycast-addresses-01#section-5.7.7 Regards, Mark. On Mon, 27 Jul 2020, 19:08 Vasilenko Eduard, <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com> 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. > 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:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Fernando Gont > Sent: 26 июля 2020 г. 8:46 > To: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org> > Cc: draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops@ietf.org > 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: internet-drafts@ietf.org > To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, Gert Doering <gert@space.net>, > Geoff Huston <gih@apnic.net>, Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>, Nick > Hilliard <nick@inex.ie> > > > 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 > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >
- [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets … Vasilenko Eduard
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Mark Smith
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Vasilenko Eduard
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Vasilenko Eduard
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Brian Carpenter
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Vasilenko Eduard
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Tom Herbert
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Vasilenko Eduard
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Tom Herbert
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Geoff Huston
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Tom Herbert
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Vasilenko Eduard
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Vasilenko Eduard
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Tom Herbert
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Geoff Huston
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Tom Herbert
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Tom Herbert
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Geoff Huston
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Tom Herbert
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Tim Chown
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Vasilenko Eduard
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Tom Herbert
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Nick Hilliard
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Geoff Huston
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Nick Hilliard
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Tom Herbert
- Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Pack… Fernando Gont