Agree with Joe, and also just to mention that RFC4459 discusses tunnel MTU
and fragmentation considerations.

Thanks - Fred

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Int-area [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe Touch
> Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 11:08 AM
> To: [email protected]; Xuxiaohu <[email protected]>
> Cc: Softwires WG <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Int-area] [nvo3] [Softwires] Is it feasible to perform 
> fragmentation on UDP encapsulated packets.
> 
> 
> 
> On 5/27/2016 3:50 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> > It is not possible to implement reassembly complying with IETF RFCs.
> 
> a) ATM does this at ridiculously high fragment rates. Granted IP frags
> can come out of order, but the fragments are generally much larger.
> 
> b) What is the alternative, given we have minimum MTU requirements?
> 
> If you're limiting yourself to IPv4 payloads where DF=0, sure, there
> there is an alternative. But you've just disabled IPv6 and IPv4 with DF=1.
> 
> I.e., it's not possible to NOT implement this and comply with IETF RFCs.
> 
> Joe
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area


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

Reply via email to