> -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Herbert [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, April 27, 2015 10:10 AM > To: Templin, Fred L > Cc: Brian Haberman; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Int-area] Why combine IP-in-UDP with GUE? > > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Templin, Fred L > <[email protected]> wrote: > > In case anyone is wondering why I have suggested combining IP-in-UDP with > > GUE, there may be some uses where only some packets in a flow need to > > include the GUE header whereas the vast majority of packets could go as > > IPv4 or IPv6 raw encapsulation. So, having everything together under the > > same UDP port number could be advantageous. At least that's what I did > > in AERO. > > > What exactly would be the advantages of this?
For one thing, it allows a natural separation of control plane and data plane (data plane as native IP-in-UDP; control plane as GUE). For another, it takes care of fragmentation using GUE encapsulation while unfragmented packets can go as native. This all comes at a savings of 4bytes per packet, which is debatable as to whether it is worth the trouble. But, if you think the overhead savings is insubstantial, I think you would probably not be in favor of IP-in-UDP native format whether/not it were bundled with GUE, right? Thanks - Fred [email protected] > > Thanks - Fred > > [email protected] > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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
