Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-intarea-ipv4-id-update-05.txt> (Updated Specification of the IPv4 ID Field) to Proposed Standard

[Masataka Ohta <[e-mail]>]

Joe Touch wrote:

>> Or, are 6 to 4 translators are required to rate limit and
>> drop rate-violating packets to make the "stateless"
>> translators full of states.
>
> I would expect that the translator would be responsible
> for this, though

Do you mean translators must rate limit, or translators
violate RFC2765:

>>            Identification:
>>                    Copied from the low-order 16-bits in the
>>                    Identification field in the Fragment header.

and use some other number as an ID?

> there is the problem that multiple translators interfere
> with each other.

Yes, even rate limiting translators may interfere each other,
which means rate limiting must be done at the IPv6 source
node.

> Regardless, this is outside the scope of the ipv4-id-update doc.

In the ID, there are a lot of references to IPv6.

For example, the following statement of the ID:

   Finally, the IPv6 ID field is
   32 bits, and required unique per source/destination address pair for
   IPv6, whereas for IPv4 it is only 16 bits and required unique per
   source/destination/protocol triple.

must be modified as:

   Finally, the IPv6 ID field is
   32 bits, but lower 16 bits are required unique per
   source/destination address pair for
   IPv6, whereas for IPv4 it is only 16 bits and required unique per
   source/destination/protocol triple.

						Masataka Ohta