On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 10:18 AM, Templin, Fred L <[email protected] > wrote:
> > > > -----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? > > It's just that I don't see much benefit in these approaches other than the four bytes savings. IMO, the main drawback of directly encapsulating IP in UDP is that it instantly becomes a feature frozen in time. We can never improve upon it or extend it-- we can't change IP fragmentation, we can't add a header checksum to get to circumvent the unpleasantness of using the UDP zero checksum with IPv6, we can't add security, etc. > 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
