Hi, Just looking now, this document is seriously messed up. It leaves open the possibility for denial of service to IPv6 packets of 1280 bytes or smaller which is a violation of the robustness principle. I had the same comment regarding the other GRE document.
If people want to see how to handle tunnel MTU, please review Section 3.13 of draft-templin-aerolink. Thanks - Fred [email protected] > -----Original Message----- > From: Int-area [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brian Haberman > Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2015 9:55 AM > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: [Int-area] AD Evaluation: draft-ietf-intarea-gre-mtu > > All, > I have completed my AD Evaluation of draft-ietf-intarea-gre-mtu as > a part of the publication process. I only have a few minor comments for > the authors to address. Once that is done, I will start the IETF Last Call. > > * Section 1 - The 4th paragraph specifies that the techniques described > in this document are limited on what protocols can be in the GRE > payload, but doesn't say anything about the delivery protocol. The > Terminology section indicates only v4 and v6 are applicable as the > delivery protocol discussed in this document. I think it would be > useful to expand the 4th paragraph of the intro to mention the limit on > the delivery protocol. > > * Section 1.1 > > - s/specific MTU discovery/specific to MTU discovery/ > > - The definition of "fragmentable packet" should include mention of IPv6 > > - The definition of PTB should be consistent and indicate that IPv6 uses > ICMPv6 Type=2 for PTB messages. > > * Section 2.2 - I would suggest clarifying the first bullet by saying > that the fragmentation logic is derived from the payload protocol. > > Regards, > Brian _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
