hi,

Ticket #21 states (http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/softwire/trac/ticket/21)

----
The current MAP-E specifications says (sec. 10.1):
"Multiple BRs using the same anycast source address could send fragmented 
packets to the same CE at the same time. If the fragmented     packets from 
different BRs happen to use the same fragment ID, incorrect reassembly might 
occur."

Reason for this is that RFC 2473 says, in sec. 7.2:
"When an IPv4 original packet enters a tunnel, if the original packet size 
exceeds the tunnel MTU ...if in the original packet header the Don't Fragment - 
DF - bit flag is CLEAR, the tunnel entry-point node encapsulates the original 
packet, and subsequently fragments the resulting IPv6 tunnel packet into IPv6 
fragments that do not exceed the Path MTU to the tunnel exit-point."

Incorrect reassembly is unacceptable but support of duplicated BRs is really 
needed, for scalability and relaiability.

Fortunately, the solution used in 4rd can be used in MAP-E too (R-13 of sec. 
4.5.1): when a fragmentable IPv4 packet is too large for encapsulation in a 
single IPv6 packet, it MUST be fragmented in IPv4 BEFORE submission to 
encapsulation. This being done, RFC-2473 fragmentation never occurs. Multiple 
BRs can use the same anycast source address without risk of incorrect 
reassembly. 
----


I see a few possible resolutions to this ticket.

0) declare changes to how RFC2473 specifies fragmentation to be done for IPv4 
over IPv6 tunnels out of scope
1) reference 4459 and suggest section 3.4 as a potential workaround, without 
being normative.
2) adopt R-13 from http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-softwire-4rd-04
3) split the IPv6 fragmentation-id space between BRs

any views on this?

Best regards,
Ole
_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

Reply via email to