Hi Suresh, So are you suggesting the non-last fragment size of less than 1280, example 1200.
I still have a doubt on this one. Can we state that the first fragment should have the complete TCP/ UDP headers? I find this essential for the case of stateless filtering, which are easier to do at line rate in the hardware. Thanks, Vishwas On 5/17/07, Suresh Krishnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0 wrote: > my take on this is that, for non-final fragment, the packet size must > not be smaller than 1280 bytes. there's no valid use for smaller > fragments (unless you have special network with MTU < 1280). I tend to disagree. I do think there are cases where it makes sense to have smaller non-final fragments. One example I can think about right away is that there is a tunnel somewhere between the source and the destination. In this case I would limit myself to a fragment size of less than 1280 to avoid further fragmentation. Cheers Suresh -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
