Hi, Lars, On Aug 8, 2013, at 9:25 AM, "Eggert, Lars" <l...@netapp.com> wrote:
> Hi, > > On Aug 7, 2013, at 22:18, Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) <cpign...@cisco.com> > wrote: >> In other words, noting S5.3 of RFC 3168 in draft-bonica-intarea-gre-mtu does >> not add as compared to not noting it -- the requirement already exists, and >> is applicable to any frag/reassembly, including GRE, any other tunnel, or >> any other protocol, as the ECN considerations at the IP layer. RFC 3168 >> specifies transport considerations for TCP and not for GRE also. > > you're correct. In practice, however, not everyone is familiar with the > contents of all related RFCs when implementing a given protocol extension, > and I think pointing implementors at relevant related specs - esp. when > mandatory to support - is a courtesy. I agree in principle with this, although there's a degree of relevance for these informational and contextual "reminder" pointers. Yes, I've also seen then be of help in practice as well, but I wouldn't want to cite every mandatory RFC related to fragmentation. In this case, draft-bonica-intarea-gre-mtu is more about fragmentation than reassembly, while S5.3 of RFC3168 concerns itself with reassembly mostly, which is why I think the correlation is tenuous. On the other side, I do not see any harm with adding it (it's not a major distraction from the main topic), and I can see potential benefit with awareness raising. > >> Net-net, in my humble opinion, since draft-bonica-intarea-gre-mtu concerns >> itself with fragmentation strategies for GRE, these two ECN issues (ECN at >> reassembly and tunnels) seem orthogonal to the scope and goal of the >> document, and better dealt with in a separate place instead of intertwining >> them in draft-bonica-intarea-gre-mtu. > > Which document specifies the reassembly of fragments carried in GRE? > RFC 791 and RFC 2460 (if I understood your question correctly :-). If IP fragments are carried in GRE, after decapsulation, IP is exposed. As far as ECN propagation and behavior, I think the best is http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-briscoe-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines-02#section-4.1 > Lars Thanks, -- Carlos.
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
