Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ?

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

 




On 2/11/2016 10:57 AM, Templin, Fred L wrote:
>> The beauty of considering a tunnel a link is that the same rules apply,
>> > as they always should have. Just as a link that can't transit an IP
>> > packet requires frag/reassembly within the link (e.g., ATM does this),
>> > so should a tunnel.
>
> This is coming close to repeating a discussion we had in intarea back in the
> August 2015 timeframe, where I thought we had reached a conclusion.

We haven't talked about it yet, but yes - this is closely related to the
INTAREA discussion on this issue and the current WG document on tunnels.

Joe




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