Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-oversized-header-chain-08.txt> (Implications of Oversized IPv6 Header Chains) to Proposed Standard

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Fred,

> Hi, I would like to make a small amendment to what I said in my
> previous message as follows:
> 
> 4) Section 5, change the final paragraph to:
> 
>   "As a result of the above mentioned requirements, a packet's header
>   chain length MUST fit within the Path MTU associated with its
>   destination.  Hosts MAY discover the Path MTU, using procedures such
>   as those defined in [RFC1981] and [RFC4821]. However, if a host does
>   not discover the Path MTU, it MUST assume the IPv6 minumum MTU of
>   1280 bytes [RFC2460]. The host MUST then limit each packet's header
>   chain length to the Path MTU minus 256 bytes in case additional
>   encapsulation headers are inserted by tunnels on the path."

I would claim that additional encapsulation headers are already considered in the 1280 minimum MTU.
as in: 1500 - 1280.

cheers,
Ole

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]