Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

> On Jun 1, 2018, at 1:53 PM, Ron Bonica wrote: > > Fair enough. You will see that text in the next version of the draft. > > Ron > > > From: C. M. Heard > Sent: Friday, June 1, 2018 12:01 PM > To: Ron Bonica > Cc: draft-intarea-frag authors ; >

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

> On Jun 2, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Ron Bonica wrote: > > ... >> >> >> This draft should reference RFC4459 which gives a very good description of >> MTU and fragmentation problems and handling for network tunnels. >> > > RB> Agree. Added in next version. intarea-tunnels will be updating that RFC

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

Hi Tom, Thanks for your review. Comments inline. > -Original Message- > From: Tom Herbert > Sent: Tuesday, March 6, 2018 11:03 AM > To: Ron Bonica > Cc: int-area@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01 > > On Mon, Mar 5, 201

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

Fair enough. You will see that text in the next version of the draft. Ron From: C. M. Heard Sent: Friday, June 1, 2018 12:01 PM To: Ron Bonica Cc: draft-intarea-frag authors ; int-area Subject: Re: draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01 On Thu, May 31,

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

On 2018-06-01 02:54, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Thu, 31 May 2018, Joe Touch wrote: > >> I disagree. >> >> UDP fragmentation has its benefits and uses, but should not be required when >> a transport layer isn't needed - e.g., for IP tunneling. >> >> Fundamentally, IP fragmentation is fragil

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

On Fri, Jun 1, 2018, 2:54 AM Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Thu, 31 May 2018, Joe Touch wrote: > > > I disagree. > > > > UDP fragmentation has its benefits and uses, but should not be required > when a transport layer isn’t needed - e.g., for IP tunneling. > > > > Fundamentally, IP fragmentation

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:39 PM, Ron Bonica wrote: > > In Section 6.1, *DNS*, please note that draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-options >

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

On Thu, 31 May 2018, Joe Touch wrote: I disagree. UDP fragmentation has its benefits and uses, but should not be required when a transport layer isn’t needed - e.g., for IP tunneling. Fundamentally, IP fragmentation is fragile for only a few reasons: 1) the ID space is small (which shouldn’t

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

> On May 31, 2018, at 12:07 PM, Ron Bonica wrote: > > Joe, > > draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-options is exactly the kind of work that the current > draft encourages. If IP fragmentation is fragile, it makes sense for > upper-layer protocols to manage fragmentation/mtu issues on their own, > without

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

Mikael, Response inline.. Ron > -Original Message- > From: Mikael Abrahamsson > Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 5:20 AM > To: int-area@ietf.org; Ron Bonica > Subject: draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01 > > > Hi, > > as promised in v6ops, I will suggest text.

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

Hi Mike, Thanks for your review. Responses inline….. Ron From: C. M. Heard Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2018 5:40 PM To: draft-intarea-frag authors Cc: int-area Subject: draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01 Draft authors, Thanks for putting this draft together. Majo

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

. Ron > -Original Message- > From: Joe Touch > Sent: Tuesday, March 6, 2018 9:39 AM > To: Bob Hinden > Cc: Ron Bonica ; int-area@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01 > > You might also want to look at t

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

Hi Mikael, Thanks for your careful review. Responses inline. Ron > -Original Message- > From: Mikael Abrahamsson > Sent: Tuesday, March 6, 2018 4:57 AM > To: Ron Bonica > Cc: int-area@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intar

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

FWIW…. Upper layer protocols can also do their own source-frag if they send IP over raw sockets. Joe > On Mar 17, 2018, at 2:40 PM, C. M. Heard wrote: > > Minor Comments: > > Section 2.2, Upper-layer Protocols, says: > >Upper-layer protocols can operate in the following modes: > >

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

ea-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Joe Touch >> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2018 8:52 AM >> To: Ron Bonica >> Cc: int-area@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01 >> >> >> >>> On Mar 7, 2018, at 7:39 AM, Ron Bonica

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

webpages talk about this. Thanks - Fred > -Original Message- > From: Int-area [mailto:int-area-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Joe Touch > Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2018 8:52 AM > To: Ron Bonica > Cc: int-area@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intar

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

an implication to router designers that I would hope can be avoided. > > Joe > > >> >> >> Ron >> >> . >>> -Original Message- >>> From: Joe Touch [mailto:to...@strayalpha.com] >>> Sent: Tuesday

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

> Ron > > . >> -Original Message- >> From: Joe Touch [mailto:to...@strayalpha.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, March 6, 2018 9:57 PM >> To: Ole Troan >> Cc: Tom Herbert ; Ron Bonica >> ; int-area@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [Int-

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

On Mar 7, 2018 7:30 AM, "Templin, Fred L" wrote: Hi Tom, > -Original Message- > From: Int-area [mailto:int-area-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tom Herbert > Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2018 8:03 AM > To: Ron Bonica > Cc: int-area@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [In

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

gmentation. Ron . > -Original Message- > From: Joe Touch [mailto:to...@strayalpha.com] > Sent: Tuesday, March 6, 2018 9:57 PM > To: Ole Troan > Cc: Tom Herbert ; Ron Bonica > ; int-area@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Int-

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

Hi Tom, > -Original Message- > From: Int-area [mailto:int-area-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tom Herbert > Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2018 8:03 AM > To: Ron Bonica > Cc: int-area@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01 > > On Mon

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

> On Mar 6, 2018, at 11:16 AM, Ole Troan wrote: > > Joe, > >> Agreed but note that draft tunnels will update that RFC in some important >> ways. > > With other concerns than those raised in e.g. 4459 and 7597? draft-tunnels corrects an error in 4459 that deals with the details, not the ove

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Ole Troan wrote: > Joe, > >> Agreed but note that draft tunnels will update that RFC in some important >> ways. > > With other concerns than those raised in e.g. 4459 and 7597? > Unfortunately there are cases where there are no other choice than to do > fragmenta

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

t-area@ietf.org; Ron Bonica > Subject: Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01 > > Joe, > > > Agreed but note that draft tunnels will update that RFC in some important > > ways. > > With other concerns than those raised in e.g. 4459 and 7597? > Unfort

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

Joe, > Agreed but note that draft tunnels will update that RFC in some important > ways. With other concerns than those raised in e.g. 4459 and 7597? Unfortunately there are cases where there are no other choice than to do fragmentation/reassembly on tunnel endpoints, but still the recommendati

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

Agreed but note that draft tunnels will update that RFC in some important ways. Joe > On Mar 6, 2018, at 8:02 AM, Tom Herbert wrote: > >> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 6:16 AM, Ron Bonica wrote: >> Folks, >> >> Please review draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01 and provide comments. The >> URL is

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 6:16 AM, Ron Bonica wrote: > Folks, > > Please review draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01 and provide comments. The > URL is https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01. > Ron, This draft should reference RFC4459 which gives a very good description of

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

You might also want to look at tsvwg-udp-options In one case, they’re used to support PLPMTUD (which you already note). Alternatively, they provide transport-layer frag/reassembly that might be useful for DNSSEC as well as enabling NAT-traversal by retaining ports across fragments. Joe > On M

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

On Mon, 5 Mar 2018, Ron Bonica wrote: Folks, Please review draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01 and provide comments. The URL is https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01. I like it. 4.6. There are cases where this "misconfiguration" is due to vendor default not bei

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

Joe, > On Mar 5, 2018, at 7:01 AM, Joe Touch wrote: > > This doc completely overlooks the role of fragmentation in IP over IP > tunneling and the reason fragmentation is critical (IP has a maximum packet > size, not just a minimum). > > See draft-ietf-intarea-tunnels. Good point. We will ta

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

om] >> Sent: Monday, March 5, 2018 10:01 AM >> To: Ron Bonica >> Cc: int-area@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01 >> >> This doc completely overlooks the role of fragmentation in IP over IP >> tunneling and the reason

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

in London. Ron > -Original Message- > From: Joe Touch [mailto:to...@strayalpha.com] > Sent: Monday, March 5, 2018 10:01 AM > To: Ron Bonica > Cc: int-area@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile

Re: [Int-area] draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01

This doc completely overlooks the role of fragmentation in IP over IP tunneling and the reason fragmentation is critical (IP has a maximum packet size, not just a minimum). See draft-ietf-intarea-tunnels. As a result, IMO the recommendations and conclusions are incorrect. Joe > On Mar 5, 2018