On Oct 8, 2012, at 19:22, Stewart Bryant <[email protected]> wrote: > My point is that we have a practical experiment ongoing with the > huge number of PWs in deployment running over MPLS without > c/s protection at the tunnel or network layer and I have never seen > anyone raise an issue in either the PWE3 or MPLS WG. Hence > my conclusion that whilst there is a theoretical risk, the evidence > is that there are no reported issues.
One reason the occasional misdirected packet is not causing problems here might be that there are higher level headers that prevent delivery to an application (be it for a checksum mismatch or more likely because the higher level addresses just don't point in the direction of trouble). Which would mesh fine with the argument made in the draft that UDP zero checksum is fine for tunnels but not so much for other applications like end-to-end. I definitely agree with the subtext that the udpzero issue is often seen a bit more dogmatic than needs be, but I also think that having this degree of robustness in a widely deployed protocol is a desirable property that shouldn't be given up lightly. Grüße, Carsten -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
