Brian and Joe are correct - tunnels within tunnels means that fragmentation and reassembly are inevitable. Wish it weren't so, but that is the reality.
Thanks - Fred > -----Original Message----- > From: Int-area [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe Touch > Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 8:34 AM > To: Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-xu-intarea-ip-in-udp-03 > > > > On 5/30/2016 1:45 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > > If you intend to support recursive datagram tunneling and believe that any > > path has > > a minimum MTU, then you have to accept reassembly. > > Agreed- at least one of the layers between the message tunnel and when > it recurses must support fragmentation and reassembly. > > Those who deploy or sell systems otherwise are in denial, not a > counter-proof. Again, this is where compliance validation would be useful. > > Joe > > _______________________________________________ > Int-area mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
