I really think it makes most sense to push put in the early allocation
request. This is a valid long term use case. There's no real shortage
of IP numbers and IANA is continuing to assign them. Also there's also
a slew of them that can be reclaimed if/when they do become scarce. I
can even
Michael Richardson wrote:
> But, we are not out of protocol numbers, and I think that if it comes to
recycling
> numbers, that maybe there are many low-hanging fruit as candidates.
> [13-16,18-26 comes easily to mind]
If I had to pick something, though, I'd pick 57, SKIP :-)
--
Mic
Christian Hopps wrote:
> 1) WRAP still requires a next-header/protocol number. Additionally it
> would reduce bandwidth, is not widely implemented, and ultimately is
> not a great fit as it's trying to solve a different problem (allowing
> more packet inspection).
> 2) We cou
Hi Tero,
I believe the discussion has died down again and we have answers to the
questions you are concerned will be raised by the other reviewers of the
request (Yoav and Benjamin for the early allocation), to wit:
1) WRAP still requires a next-header/protocol number. Additionally it would
On 6/8/2020 7:05 AM, Steffen Klassert wrote:
On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 09:43:41PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
Steffen Klassert wrote:
> This alterative usecase tries to solve the 'small packet' tunneling
> problem. Sending small packets over a tunnel usually creates quite a
On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 09:43:41PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Steffen Klassert wrote:
> > This alterative usecase tries to solve the 'small packet' tunneling
> > problem. Sending small packets over a tunnel usually creates quite a
> > lot of overhead, as each packet needs
Steffen Klassert wrote:
> This alterative usecase tries to solve the 'small packet' tunneling
> problem. Sending small packets over a tunnel usually creates quite a
> lot of overhead, as each packet needs to get it's own tunnel header
> etc. For IPsec, the situation is even wors
On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 11:56:48AM -0400, Christian Hopps wrote:
> > On Jun 2, 2020, at 10:21 AM, Tero Kivinen wrote:
> > Christian Hopps writes:
>
> > I would assume those questions are going to be asked from chairs or
> > area directors during the process anyways, so we need to have good
> > an
Tero Kivinen wrote:
> I am bit concerned about this. First of all, as far as I understand
> for IPsec we do not need real IP protocol number, as the number we are
> using is never going to appear anywhere in the actual IP packet
> header, it only appears in the ESP trailer Next He
> On Jun 2, 2020, at 10:21 AM, Tero Kivinen wrote:
>
> Christian Hopps writes:
>> Dear ipsecme Chairs,
>>
>> This request is inline with the guidelines as set forth in RFC7120
>> (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7120)
>>
>> I would like to request early allocation of the IP protocol number
>
10 matches
Mail list logo
