On 3/9/19 17:33, Templin (US), Fred L wrote:
> Why was this section taken out:
>  
>> 1.1.  IP-in-IP Tunnels 
>>     
>>    This document acknowledges that in some cases, packets must be     
>>    fragmented within IP-in-IP tunnels [I-D.ietf-intarea-tunnels].     
>>    Therefore, this document makes no additional recommendations     
>>    regarding IP-in-IP tunnels.
> 
> Tunnels always inflate the size of packets to the point that they may exceed
> the path MTU even if the original packet is no larger than the path MTU. And,
> for IPv6 the only guarantee is 1280. Therefore, in order to robustly support
> the minimum IPv6 MTU tunnels MUST employ fragmentation.

Isn't that an oxymoron? If fragmentation is fragile, if you need
something robust, you need to rely on something else....

-- 
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

Reply via email to