Branimir, >> "When an lwB4 receives an IPv4 packet from its connected host that is >> larger than the MTU size after encapsulation, the lwB4 MUST fragment >> the IPv4 packet before encapsulation." >> >> If the DF flag is set, the packet shouldn't be fragmented, instead PMTUD >> mechanism should be honored. Right? Fragmenting an IPv4 packet with DF bit >> set sounds like a bad thing. > > One more thing I find puzzling - RFCs 2473 and 6333 state that you have to > encapsulate the packet first into IPv6 and if it exceeds the IPv4-in-IPv6 > tunnel MTU, fragment the IPv6 packet. This draft states the opposite thing, > if the encapsulated packet is larger than the tunnel MTU, you have to > fragment IPv4 and then encapsulate it into IPv6. In my opinion, the simpler > thing to do would be to encapsulate first and fragment afterwards.
RFC4459 gives a good analysis of the problem. > I think this is also a problem because RFC 6333 describes fragmentation only > from the AFTR's viewpoint and this draft describes it from the B4's > viewpoint. Since this draft refers to RFC6333 for fragmentation, it would > mean that the lwAFTR and lwB4 would have different fragmentation logic. cheers, Ole
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
