Applicability Statement for the use of IPv6 UDP Datagrams with Zero Checksums
draft-ietf-6man-udpzero-07

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (6man WG)
Last updated 2012-12-04 (latest revision 2012-10-22)
Replaces draft-6man-udpzero, draft-fairhurst-tsvwg-6man-udpzero
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Informational
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication
Doc Shepherd Follow-up Underway
Document shepherd Ole Trøan
Shepherd write-up Show (last changed 2012-09-12)
IESG IESG state IESG Evaluation::Revised I-D Needed
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Has enough positions to pass.
Responsible AD Brian Haberman
Send notices to 6man-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-6man-udpzero@tools.ietf.org
Internet Engineering Task Force                             G. Fairhurst
Internet-Draft                                    University of Aberdeen
Intended status: Standards Track                           M. Westerlund
Expires: April 25, 2013                                         Ericsson
                                                        October 22, 2012

  Applicability Statement for the use of IPv6 UDP Datagrams with Zero
                               Checksums
                       draft-ietf-6man-udpzero-07

Abstract

   This document provides an applicability statement for the use of UDP
   transport checksums when used with IPv6.  This defines
   recommendations and requirements for use of IPv6 UDP datagrams with a
   zero checksum.  It examines the role of the IPv6 UDP transport
   checksum, as defined in RFC2460 and presents a summary of the trade-
   offs for evaluating the safety of updating RFC 2460 to permit an IPv6
   UDP endpoint to use a zero value in the checksum field as an
   indication that no checksum is present.  This method is compared with
   some other possibilities.  The document also describes the issues and
   design principles that need to be considered when UDP is used with
   IPv6 to support tunnel encapsulations.

   XXX NOTE - This revision is a partial response to comments received
   during IESG review.  There are additional comments to be incorporated
   - and updates anticipated to the related PS that updates IPv6.  This
   is therefore an interim version.  XXX

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on April 25, 2013.

Copyright Notice

Fairhurst & Westerlund   Expires April 25, 2013                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft   Applicability of IPv6 UDP Zero Checksum    October 2012

   Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Fairhurst & Westerlund   Expires April 25, 2013                 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft   Applicability of IPv6 UDP Zero Checksum    October 2012

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     1.1.  Document Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     1.2.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     1.3.  Use of UDP Tunnels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
       1.3.1.  Motivation for new approaches  . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       1.3.2.  Reducing forwarding cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       1.3.3.  Need to inspect the entire packet  . . . . . . . . . .  7
       1.3.4.  Interactions with middleboxes  . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       1.3.5.  Support for load balancing . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   2.  Standards-Track Transports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     2.1.  UDP with Standard Checksum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     2.2.  UDP-Lite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       2.2.1.  Using UDP-Lite as a Tunnel Encapsulation . . . . . . .  9
     2.3.  General Tunnel Encapsulations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   3.  Issues Requiring Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     3.1.  Effect of packet modification in the network . . . . . . . 11
       3.1.1.  Corruption of the destination IP address . . . . . . . 12
       3.1.2.  Corruption of the source IP address  . . . . . . . . . 12
       3.1.3.  Corruption of Port Information . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
       3.1.4.  Delivery to an unexpected port . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
       3.1.5.  Corruption of Fragmentation Information  . . . . . . . 15
     3.2.  Validating the network path  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
     3.3.  Applicability of method  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
     3.4.  Impact on non-supporting devices or applications . . . . . 18
Show full document text