Applicability Statement for the use of IPv6 UDP Datagrams with Zero Checksums
draft-ietf-6man-udpzero-11

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (6man WG)
Last updated 2013-02-25 (latest revision 2013-02-21)
Replaces draft-6man-udpzero, draft-fairhurst-tsvwg-6man-udpzero
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Proposed Standard
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
Needs 9 more YES or NO OBJECTION positions to pass.
Responsible AD Brian Haberman
Send notices to 6man-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-6man-udpzero@tools.ietf.org
IANA IANA review state IANA - Review Needed
IANA action state None
Internet Engineering Task Force                             G. Fairhurst
Internet-Draft                                    University of Aberdeen
Intended status: Standards Track                           M. Westerlund
Expires: August 25, 2013                                        Ericsson
                                                       February 21, 2013

  Applicability Statement for the use of IPv6 UDP Datagrams with Zero
                               Checksums
                       draft-ietf-6man-udpzero-11

Abstract

   This document provides an applicability statement for the use of UDP
   transport checksums with IPv6.  It defines recommendations and
   requirements for the use of IPv6 UDP datagrams with a zero UDP
   checksum.  It describes the issues and design principles that need to
   be considered when UDP is used with IPv6 to support tunnel
   encapsulations and examines the role of the IPv6 UDP transport
   checksum.  The document also identifies issues and constraints for
   deployment on network paths that include middleboxes.  An appendix
   presents a summary of the trade-offs that were considered in
   evaluating the safety of the update to RFC 2460 that updates use of
   the UDP checksum with IPv6.

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 August 25, 2013.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2013 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

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

   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.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     1.1.  Document Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     2.1.  UDP with Standard Checksum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     2.2.  UDP-Lite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       2.2.1.  Using UDP-Lite as a Tunnel Encapsulation . . . . . . .  9
     2.3.  General Tunnel Encapsulations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     2.4.  Relation to UDP-Lite and UDP with checksum . . . . . . . . 10
   3.  Issues Requiring Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
     3.1.  Effect of packet modification in the network . . . . . . . 12
       3.1.1.  Corruption of the destination IP address . . . . . . . 14
       3.1.2.  Corruption of the source IP address  . . . . . . . . . 14
       3.1.3.  Corruption of Port Information . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
       3.1.4.  Delivery to an unexpected port . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
       3.1.5.  Corruption of Fragmentation Information  . . . . . . . 17
     3.2.  Where Packet Corruption Occurs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
     3.3.  Validating the network path  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
     3.4.  Applicability of method  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
     3.5.  Impact on non-supporting devices or applications . . . . . 21
   4.  Constraints on implementation of IPv6 nodes supporting
       zero checksum  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
   5.  Requirements on usage of the zero UDP checksum . . . . . . . . 23
Show full document text