Ole, > -----Original Message----- > From: Ole Troan [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, September 06, 2019 9:35 AM > To: Templin (US), Fred L <[email protected]> > Cc: Joe Touch <[email protected]>; Ron Bonica > <[email protected]>; [email protected]; IESG > <[email protected]>; Joel Halpern <[email protected]>; > [email protected]; Suresh Krishnan > <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Int-area] Discussion about Section 6.1 in > draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile > > >>>>> And of course encapsulation can also exacerbate the problem > >>>>> by increasing packet size. > > > > All this means is that the fragmentation layer needs to take into account > > the > > size of the outer encapsulation layers that will be added and make sure its > > fragments do not exceed 1280 bytes *after* encapsulation. So, e.g., if the > > encapsulation layer adds an IPv6 header and a UDP header the fragmentation > > layer should not produce fragments larger than 1280 - 40 - 8 = 1232. If the > > fragmentation layer does not know the size of the outer encapsulations to > > be added, it can overestimate and set a safe smaller value (e.g., 1024). > > Yes, absolutely. But I don't think we are talking about IP fragmentation any > more.
No - it is simply RFC8200-standard IPv6 fragmentation - not something else. Fred > Cheers, > Ole _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
