Hi Joe, > But, good PTBs are useful when you can get them. > > > That's also why the mechanism we discussed does NOT rely on PTBs - it > > relies on liveness detection. > > Unless you want the egress to ACK each data packet received, I don't > see how that squares with ECMP/LAG. If your liveness detection is > only checking some paths and not others, data packets may be black > holing over other (untested) paths.
More importantly, failure to receive an ACK is not necessarily a sign of a path MTU limitation whereas receipt of a (good) NACK is. An ICMP PTB provides such a NACK, but can only be accepted if there is operational assurance that it is authentic. Thanks - Fred [email protected] _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
