On 25 feb 2008, at 18:58, Templin, Fred L wrote: > "Subnetwork Encapsulation and Adaptation Layer (SEAL)" > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-templin-seal-03.txt
"Robust duplicate packet detection": doesn't that go against the end- to-end principle? Why is it useful to spend cycles detecting this in the adaption layer when the endpoints need to to it anyway? "virtual ethernet": does this mean that there will be an ethernet header in there somewhere? That seems wasteful. Also, I don't see any mechanisms for using more than two statically configured tunnel endpoints. The ITE additionally admits all inner packets larger than 2KB into the VET interface as single-segment SEAL packets under the assumption that original sources that send packets larger than 1500 bytes are using an end-to-end MTU determination capability such as specified in [RFC4821]. I disagree with this assumption. Are there ANY RFC 4821 implementations today? Is it a good idea to hardcode values? If you run SEAL on a small network with a larger MTU you could support larger packets without fragmentation. And on MANETs it could be useful to support really small MTUs. Or alternatively, it could be good to present an artificially larger MTU to the users of SEAL because this saves overhead on inner headers. But the part that really bothers me is that there will ALWAYS be fragmentation even when the source host would have been perfectly capable of reducing its packet size. Iljitsch _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
