nanog mailing list archives

Re: WIndows Updates Fail Via IPv6 - Update!


From: Fernando Gont <fgont () si6networks com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2019 03:38:56 -0300

On 6/3/19 03:29, Mark Andrews wrote:


On 6 Mar 2019, at 3:37 pm, Fernando Gont <fgont () si6networks com> wrote:

On 6/3/19 01:09, Mark Andrews wrote:


On 6 Mar 2019, at 1:30 pm, Fernando Gont <fgont () si6networks com> wrote:

On 3/3/19 18:04, Mark Andrews wrote:
There are lots of IDIOTS out there that BLOCK ALL ICMP.  That blocks PTB getting
back to the TCP servers.  There are also IDIOTS that deploy load balancers that
DO NOT LOOK INSIDE ICMP messages for redirecting ICMP messages to the correct
back end.  There are also IDOITS that rate limit PTB generation to ridiculously
low rates.  One should be able to generate PTB at line rate.

Everyone that has configured mss-fix-up has contributed to misunderstanding that
you can block ICMP.  It is time we had a flag day to REMOVE mss-fix-up from all
the boxes you control.  We need to get PTB working and unfortunately that means
that we need to stop pandering to admins who don’t know how IP is supposed to
work.  ICMP is NOT optional.

It would seem IETF's intention is to actually move away from
ICMPv6-based PMTUD, to the extent that is possible. (RFC4821).

Which is not a reason to not fix broken equipment and misconfigured firewalls.
The workarounds are basically there because people deploy broken equipment.

Agreed. That said, it wasn't solved in 30+ years of IPv4. Do you have
hopes it will be different with IPv6?

Make a big enough stink and it will get fixed.  People just don’t make enough of
a stink.  Use social media.  None of the companies with broken firewalls really
want their idiotic practices pointed out in public.  Start doing so every time
you see it #STUPIDFIREWALL.

At times, it's fw defaults. Other times, it is admin policies.

RFC4821 seems to signal that the IETF has given up in making ICMP-based
PMTUD work, and aims at a (mostly) ICMP-free PMTUD.

Essentially, when brokenness is widespread, you have to come-up with
workarounds. And when workarounds are sufficiently widespread, there's
less of an incentive to fix the original issue.

Other times, there's a disconnect between with protocol standards,
products, and operational requirements. That's the case of IPv6 EHs.
This is their usability on the public Internet: RFC 7872.  And these are
some of the reasons why you get the numbers in RFC 7872:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops

Cheers,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont () si6networks com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492





Current thread: