On 5/3/19 12:36, Tom Herbert wrote: > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 6:21 AM Templin (US), Fred L > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi Tom, >> >> I'm sorry I haven't had a chance to read this yet, but the AERO draft has for >> a long time proposed including an IPv6 fragment header as the next header >> in an IPv4 packet (see Appendix A of 'draft-templin-intarea-6706bis'). Is >> what >> you are proposing essentially the same thing? >> > Fred, > > Looks like it is for fragmentaton (ESP and AH are already extension > headers used with IPv4). Use of the fragment header with IPv4 is > compelling because it could address deficencies in IPv4 fragmentation > like the small ID field. It might also free up IPID to be used as an > IPv4 flow label (RFC6864 states IPID can be arbitrarily set for atomic > datagrams).
Isn't the general consensus to move away from fragmentation as much as possible? -- Fernando Gont SI6 Networks e-mail: [email protected] PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492 _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
