You might also want to look at tsvwg-udp-options

In one case, they’re used to support PLPMTUD (which you already note).

Alternatively, they provide transport-layer frag/reassembly that might be 
useful for DNSSEC as well as enabling NAT-traversal by retaining ports across 
fragments.

Joe

> On Mar 5, 2018, at 8:46 AM, Bob Hinden <bob.hin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Joe,
> 
>> On Mar 5, 2018, at 7:01 AM, Joe Touch <to...@strayalpha.com> wrote:
>> 
>> This doc completely overlooks the role of fragmentation in IP over IP 
>> tunneling and the reason fragmentation is critical (IP has a maximum packet 
>> size, not just a minimum).
>> 
>> See draft-ietf-intarea-tunnels.
> 
> Good point.  We will take a look at intarea-tunnels and look at some changes 
> to the fragmentation draft.
> 
> Bob
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> As a result, IMO the recommendations and conclusions are incorrect.
>> 
>> Joe
>> 
>>> On Mar 5, 2018, at 6:16 AM, Ron Bonica <rbon...@juniper.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Folks,
>>> 
>>> Please review draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01 and provide comments. 
>>> The URL is https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bonica-intarea-frag-fragile-01.
>>> 
>>>                                                                             
>>>         Ron
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Int-area mailing list
>>> Int-area@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Int-area mailing list
>> Int-area@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
> 

_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
Int-area@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

Reply via email to