IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] WG Doc? draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops

Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> Mon, 14 March 2016 20:55 UTC

Return-Path: <nick@foobar.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 878CE12D69C for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Mar 2016 13:55:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-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 dlgLBhx88_BN for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Mar 2016 13:55:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.netability.ie (mail.netability.ie [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 829B512D697 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Mar 2016 13:55:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Envelope-To: v6ops@ietf.org
Received: from cupcake.foobar.org (089-101-070076.ntlworld.ie [89.101.70.76] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netability.ie (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id u2EKtE5V081891 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 14 Mar 2016 20:55:14 GMT (envelope-from nick@foobar.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: cheesecake.ibn.ie: Host 089-101-070076.ntlworld.ie [89.101.70.76] (may be forged) claimed to be cupcake.foobar.org
Message-ID: <56E72531.8080109@foobar.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 20:55:13 +0000
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
User-Agent: Postbox 4.0.8 (Macintosh/20151105)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
References: <A277BE71-BD70-4AFE-97DA-F224D7DBBCB8@cisco.com> <BDA56C2D-788D-421C-B44A-1A29578F0F78@employees.org> <56E318C7.5020200@gmail.com> <F57DFD38-FC99-45AE-B41D-51B0565148B1@employees.org> <CALx6S37vNXk-g=W4n_Qvd2J=7xkgydvGEUwrhu8pRQig0hoqLg@mail.gmail.com> <1BB37194-0F5B-45C1-9DFA-87B1C28264D2@employees.org> <CALx6S37vfDcchTa5Tch+BS8rQAGgPP_EeYbVz19WBchSHTqExg@mail.gmail.com> <56E60B0D.6070600@gmail.com> <CALx6S36_Vi4XZfPvCNY42zpbXy9dXeXzwE8KedxYDhne371HHA@mail.gmail.com> <56E6326B.2090303@gmail.com> <CALx6S353ognNHWnjbNSdW5hb_e6Hv3LqLa_r+e9yEW4F=cjH=A@mail.gmail.com> <56E6FC18.1060304@foobar.org> <CALx6S35pcSj_LLnDWJ68KwSYiHeu6FwrXTaR4N2xE6aY7MRO1A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S35pcSj_LLnDWJ68KwSYiHeu6FwrXTaR4N2xE6aY7MRO1A@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/xflbgifbWoanpJKRNSnwwRiS-S4>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] WG Doc? draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 14 Mar 2016 20:55:22 -0000

Tom Herbert wrote:
> iOS already sends non-zero IPv6 flow labels, we have changed Linux 
> default to use IPv6 flow label so once Android rebases the kernel
> the majority of IPv6 end hosts should be sending non-zero flow
> labels. It is far easier and shorter time to change the software
> stacks to send them than upgrading all the HW in the paths to use
> them productively.

I'm not disagreeing, but bear in mind that flow labels were defined over
20 years ago and they're still only used in a minority of cases.

All this is slightly beside the point, though - this is an informational
draft, simply noting reasons why packets with EHs are dropped.  The
reason we're writing the draft is that when you turn EHs on, you can
expect large-scale packet loss.  As far as the authors are concerned,
this is a bad thing.

Nick

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email