Hi Fred,

Thanks for your comment. Please see my response inline.

From: Int-area [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Fred Baker (fred)
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 1:53 AM
To: Wassim Haddad
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp-03

I, for one, am opposed. I have two issues. One is summarized fairly succinctly 
in RFC 1326; there are technical issues in mutual encapsulation. The other is 
in the general form of "good grief". I don't think the draft adequately

[Xiaohu] I’m confused by your intention of raising the technical issues in 
mutual encapsulation as described in RFC1326. Are you against the necessity of 
Softwire services (e.g., IPv6-over-IPv4)?

argues for yet-another-tunnel format.It tells how to do it and asks for a port 
number, but the arguments for doing it don't make sense to me.

[Xiaohu] The argument for doing IP-in-UDP is clearly described in the Introduce 
section as follows:

   To fully utilize the bandwidth available in IP networks and/or
   facilitate recovery from a link or node failure, load balancing of
   traffic over Equal Cost Multi-Path (ECMP) and/or Link Aggregation
   Group (LAG) across IP networks is widely used.  
[RFC5640<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5640>] describes a
   method for improving the load balancing efficiency in a network
   carrying Softwire Mesh service 
[RFC5565<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5565>] over Layer Two Tunneling
   Protocol - Version 3 (L2TPv3) [RFC3931<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3931>] 
and Generic Routing
   Encapsulation (GRE) [RFC2784<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2784>] 
encapsulations.  However, this method
   requires core routers to perform hash calculation on the "load-
   balancing" field contained in tunnel encapsulation headers (i.e., the
   Session ID field in L2TPv3 headers or the Key field in GRE headers),
   which is not widely supported by existing core routers.

   Most existing routers in IP networks are already capable of
   distributing IP traffic "microflows" 
[RFC2474<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2474>] over ECMP paths and/or



Xu, et al.               Expires August 3, 2016                 [Page 2]
________________________________
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp-03#page-3>
Internet-Draft           Encapsulating IP in UDP            January 2016


   LAG based on the hash of the five-tuple of User Datagram Protocol
   (UDP) [RFC0768<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc0768>] and Transmission 
Control Protocol (TCP) packets
   (i.e., source IP address, destination IP address, source port,
   destination port, and protocol).  By encapsulating the Softwire
   service traffic into an UDP tunnel and using the source port of the
   UDP header as an entropy field, the existing load-balancing
   capability as mentioned above can be leveraged to provide fine-
   grained load-balancing of Softwire service traffic traffic over IP
   networks.

In addition, the use of UDP tunnels with source port being used as an entropy 
field has been widely accepted in the IETF community (see the following 
examples).

p LISP [RFC6830]
p VXLAN [RFC7348]
p MPLS-in-UDP [RFC7510]
p TRILL-in-UDP [draft-ietf-trill-over-ip-05]
p NSH-in-UDP [draft-kumar-sfc-nsh-udp-transport]
p VXLAN-GPE 
[draft-ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe<https://tools.ietf.org/wg/nvo3/draft-ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe/>
 ]
p GENEVE 
[draft-ietf-nvo3-geneve<https://tools.ietf.org/wg/nvo3/draft-ietf-nvo3-geneve/> 
]
GUE [draft-ietf-nvo3-gue<https://tools.ietf.org/wg/nvo3/draft-ietf-nvo3-gue/> ]

It seems very straightforward to use the UDP tunnels to carry IP traffic as 
well in the Softwire scenarios.

Best regards,
Xiaohu
On May 19, 2016, at 10:03 AM, Wassim Haddad 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Dear all,

The authors of draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp-03 (“Encapsulating IP in UDP”) have 
requested that the working group adopt this work as a WG work item.
So far, WG chairs have not seen widespread support and considering that lack of 
opposition does not qualify as support, we’re starting a working group adoption 
call until June 3rd.

If you consider that the draft should be adopted as a WG work item, please 
indicate the reason.


Regards,

Wassim & Juan Carlos




_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

Reply via email to