On 2018-08-02 12:33, Ole Troan wrote:
> Joe,
>
> I am not ignoring them; I'm claiming that they all have the same inherent
> deployment and implementation limitations.
>
> Just because operators/vendors "want" to do otherwise does not make it
> possible.
> There was IETF consensus behind those documents (A+P).
You mean the *experimental* RFCs that describe an approach that doesn't
update RFC791? (i.e., RFC6364?) Or something else?
The protocol specifications of A+P are all standards track.
RFC7596, RFC7597, RFC7599.
Thanks for the refs. Note that none of those update RFCs 791 or 1122, so
if frag breaks them, then it's their error.
It also looks like (at first glance at least) these devices work only
when there isn't multipath between the back and front side.
Joe
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
