In message 
<cal9jlabek2eh2jejmm2rjrugj6ctqtfzojyhkrp7hzjtefq...@mail.gmail.com>, 
Christopher Morrow writes:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 8:49 PM, Mark Andrews <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Unfortunately the former are far too prevalent.  It's undoubtedly too
> >> late, but unfortunately it might have been better to do the
> >> fragmentation within the UDP payload (i.e. inside DNS) somehow (c.f.
> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5405#section-3.2).
> >
> > It is *never* too late.  For IPv6 we are still in the very
> > early days.
> 
> but, what about the 'vast install base'  ?

There isn't a "vast install base" of firewalls (border routers).
If there was we would have 99% IPv6 traffic instead of 1.6% IPv6
traffic.

The key is to get the functionality into firewalls/load balancer
etc. ASAP.  Hosts can happen as they are replaced as part of normal
refresh cycles or apps can use raw sockets if they need the
functionality sooner.  The IPv6 layer will fragment the raw packets
with the hop-by-hop header fine.

Mark

-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: [email protected]
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Reply via email to