Authors, I have already worked out the details of the algorithms your draft is seeking in SEAL:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-templin-intarea-seal/ There are exactly two differences between SEAL and GRE: - SEAL does not use IP frag/reass; it uses its own frag/reass mechanisms at a layer above IP - SEAL requires that the tunnel egress reassemble enough so that all packets that are no larger than 1500 bytes will be accommodated unconditionally. With GRE, the best the tunnel ingress can assume is that the egress has a 1500 byte reassembly buffer, which is not big enough to hold a 1500 byte packet plus the encapsulation overhead I will say again that for IPv6 the GRE tunnel MUST accommodate packet sizes up to 1280 as specified in RFC2460. And, when the path over which the tunnel is configured only has a 1280 MTU the GRE tunnel MUST use IP frag/reass to meet the IPv6 minMTU requirement. But, we are seeing in other discussions that both IPv6 frag/reass and IPv6 PMTUD may not work very well in some environments. Thanks - Fred [email protected] _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
