Thanks for the updated draft. Here are a few comments: "While this document identifies issues associated with IP fragmentation, it does not recommend deprecation. Some applications (e.g., [I-D.ietf-intarea-tunnels]) require IP fragmentation."
I would add that use of fragmentation is also expected to work and be common in limited domains where issues in security and interoperability in intermediate nodes can be addressed, >From the draft: "This section explains how IP fragmentation reduces the reliability of Internet communication." In reality, for most of the examples in this section it's really implementations (NAT, firewall, etc.) that are breaking IP fragmentation (and other things as well). Sections 4.1-4.4 could be summarized to say that some intermediate devices perform functions based on inspecting transport layer headers, and these fail when fragments are presented that don't contain the transport layer information. This could be further subdivided into stateful and stateless mechanisms. Policy routing, firewalls, NAT are just examples of functions that break with fragmentation. For section 4.5 I'm not sure that being insecure makes fragmentation unreliable. Similarly 4.6 isn't really a problem with fragmentation but a process to avoid fragmentation. Maybe section 4 should be "Problems related to the use of IP fragmentation". "It is difficult to determine why network operators drop fragments." In what sense is this "difficult"? Difficult because there are no ICMP errors for dropped fragments, difficult because network operators don't share their policy on fragmentation, or other meaning? Tom On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 7:38 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > This draft is a work item of the Internet Area Working Group WG of the IETF. > > Title : IP Fragmentation Considered Fragile > Authors : Ron Bonica > Fred Baker > Geoff Huston > Robert M. Hinden > Ole Troan > Fernando Gont > Filename : draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-01.txt > Pages : 24 > Date : 2018-10-10 > > Abstract: > This document describes IP fragmentation and explains how it reduces > the reliability of Internet communication. > > This document also proposes alternatives to IP fragmentation and > provides recommendations for developers and network operators. > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile/ > > There are also htmlized versions available at: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-01 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-01 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-01 > > > 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. > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > _______________________________________________ > Int-area mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
