On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 8:24 PM, Toerless Eckert <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 09:48:25AM +0200, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: >> I've kept saying "Networks must support ip fragmentation properly. > > Why ? Wheren't you also saying that you've got (like probably many > else on this thread) all the experience that only TCP MSS gets you > working connectivity in many case (like hotels) ? > > IMHO, we (network layer) should accept defeat on network layer > fragmentation and agree that we should make it easier for the > transport layer to resolve the problem. > > Aka: I would lvoe to see a new ICMPv4/ICMPv6 reply and/or PTB reply option > indicating "Fragmented Packets Not Permitted". Any network device which > for whatever reason does not like Fragemnts would simply drop > fragmented packets and send this as a reply. Allows then the > transport layer to automatically use packetization (such as TCP MSS) > to get packets through. > > Of course. Will take a decade to get ubiquitously deployed, but > neither IPv4 nor IPv6 will go away, only the problems with fragmentation > will become worse and work if we do not have an exit strategy like this. > Toeless,
I'm curious why you think the problems with fragmentation will become worse. The draft and much of this thread has already highlighted the problems with fragmentation that happen because of non-conformant implementation. While there's a lot of legacy implementation that might hard to fix completely, I don't think we've seen a good argument that these problems are infeasible to fix in new deployments and products. I think this draft is an opportunity not only highlight the problems, but to suggest some practical fixes to improve the situation as a way forward. Tom > If we don't try an exit strategy like this, we will just get what > Joe said, the complete segmentation of the Internet with more and > more L4 or even higher layer proxies. > > Btw: +1 for adopting the doc as a WG item, but primarily because everything > before section 7 is on a way to become a good read of reality. Section > 7 recommendations is only a faith based exercise (praying) as long as it > tries to > get the job done primarily by appealing to application developers. > > Cheers > Toerless > > > _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
