Re: [IPsec] -ikev2-mtu-dect: IKEv2 PTB Notification

2023-08-01 Thread Christian Hopps
"Panwei (William)" writes: Hi Daniel, Thanks for your clarification, I think I may have better understanding of your problem statement. I try to give an example below, please correct me if I’m wrong. First, let’s assume the encryption/decryption capability of ingress node is 15000 bytes

Re: [IPsec] -ikev2-mtu-dect: IKEv2 PTB Notification

2023-08-01 Thread Panwei (William)
Hi Daniel, Thanks for your clarification, I think I may have better understanding of your problem statement. I try to give an example below, please correct me if I’m wrong. First, let’s assume the encryption/decryption capability of ingress node is 15000 bytes and the capability of egress

Re: [IPsec] -ikev2-mtu-dect: IKEv2 PTB Notification

2023-08-01 Thread Christian Hopps
Hi, FWIW, Here's what I was saying at the mic during the ipsec meeting @117. It may have relevance to the discussion about EMTU... You own the tunnel endpoints since you're configuring security tunnels on them. Normal PMTU will work fine if, for some reason, you need your ingress to discover

Re: [IPsec] -ikev2-mtu-dect: IKEv2 PTB Notification

2023-08-01 Thread Michael Richardson
Paul Wouters wrote: > On Aug 1, 2023, at 12:56, Daniel Migault wrote: >> >>  Hi Ben, Just trying to position our understanding of the position >> between the ICMP PTB and the IKE PTB. If an incoming Encrypted packet >> is larger than the Link MTU > How can than be?

Re: [IPsec] -ikev2-mtu-dect: IKEv2 PTB Notification

2023-08-01 Thread Daniel Migault
Hi Paul, Please see my response in line. Yours, Daniel On Tue, Aug 1, 2023 at 2:15 PM Paul Wouters wrote: > On Aug 1, 2023, at 12:56, Daniel Migault wrote: > > >  > > Hi Ben, > > Just trying to position our understanding of the position between the ICMP > PTB and the IKE PTB. > > If an

Re: [IPsec] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-colitti-ipsecme-esp-ping-00.txt

2023-08-01 Thread Tero Kivinen
Michael Richardson writes: > > Tero Kivinen wrote: > > I think we should use normal ESP format i.e. have ESP SPI using > > following format: > > I mostly agree. > But: > > > (0-255 bytes) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | > > It would be nice to be able to

Re: [IPsec] -ikev2-mtu-dect: IKEv2 PTB Notification

2023-08-01 Thread Paul Wouters
On Aug 1, 2023, at 12:56, Daniel Migault wrote: > >  > Hi Ben, > Just trying to position our understanding of the position between the ICMP > PTB and the IKE PTB. > If an incoming Encrypted packet is larger than the Link MTU How can than be? You mean you received an ESP or ESPinUDP that

Re: [IPsec] -ikev2-mtu-dect: IKEv2 PTB Notification

2023-08-01 Thread Daniel Migault
Hi Ben, Just trying to position our understanding of the position between the ICMP PTB and the IKE PTB. If an incoming Encrypted packet is larger than the Link MTU, an ICMP PTB is sent, otherwise the packet is accepted. If fragments are received, a reassembly operation happens and the packet