IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ?

Doug Royer <douglasroyer@gmail.com> Tue, 09 February 2016 21:46 UTC

Return-Path: <douglasroyer@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45ECA1B2A61 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 13:46:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7D02TkgoVXw9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 13:46:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pa0-x235.google.com (mail-pa0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90FBF1B2A51 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 13:46:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pa0-x235.google.com with SMTP id kp3so298306pab.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 13:46:21 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type; bh=on8i23Tg9ZHzvxmyxjLPh71YGEZOAoqI7IAJyFth7eA=; b=wHmvOSbi7JU1IupCFszNW/28ghgn11cGiCapHFq/f9x/Lh2/PCb7r0MOlSoVuJBuY3 rfwqDotbzABTG479gmTuHLGOil8Dc1iZCz61/ICBZP+egCwjxWdvlrAVJQovkbKAlfhK ZmGqTJGz2+5YLU+kx1Th/c5CEq9AMYrRJZhi50meV4X6tv5O+lcrmpkMg12j/tvPGMCh va/y5WBpxeRE9/T64XQWL+gTHJVHr2nVLwfM1cSF5dN/0I/q8qnRU64BDAAqyFnG3Ns8 F0clPqP4crjX6zU9SK9D6mqRnzQfVYL5ZuoRJUiE3bp3qsAjrs7orRfovw7FrrnJ8vgf 7f5Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type; bh=on8i23Tg9ZHzvxmyxjLPh71YGEZOAoqI7IAJyFth7eA=; b=bb9FGszVyM5jKInDffW8+Q+UIfpz7HcLCxFGDOBSIZm2MQr10u7IZSW/C0CLauWIIT X42AyMu5KbDIaxOstaX+6liboilX5usCQV0VFXFwHdfBEduD7QfEgUxdlEfMyH2p12HK DqfPHa1wkRsSnxWisaRJsnwJF3zEh+tt3ube0IszFPXv1jHFM5oFuNhPaSGql0fGCGKO p+BZUTFebKQWnYdV45I9P0F0Zvd9LzzrsLamHBA6MVATZEIqeEbcBhtGMc5CgkodGKrV C7MwA3+gnEseESPMr4BSazsHdgRzVdzDC3s445r8HvA/l/q/MwF2zq/VGjJQcRoxO1c8 OnRQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOQOCkbJNie+1xjSfAXJwBoyrgPoCBcLHUwMqfm+wbBbSZPczmyV9hhM+QARVg7qig==
X-Received: by 10.66.251.68 with SMTP id zi4mr1070486pac.113.1455054381278; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 13:46:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.4] ([75.174.2.244]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id z5sm6357pas.29.2016.02.09.13.46.20 for <ietf@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 09 Feb 2016 13:46:20 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ?
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <CAOJ6w=EvzE3dM4Y2mFFR=9YyPBdmFu_jkF4-42LjkdbRd3yz_w@mail.gmail.com> <BLUPR05MB1985F5F2BB3118362C67B921AED50@BLUPR05MB1985.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <56BA4B77.2050901@isi.edu>
From: Doug Royer <douglasroyer@gmail.com>
Organization: http://SoftwareAndServices.NET
Message-ID: <56BA5E2B.4020700@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2016 14:46:19 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <56BA4B77.2050901@isi.edu>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"; boundary="------------ms080709040802010907050106"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/_MsH672iLsiBmvyKxWm0ksnJW68>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2016 21:46:23 -0000

On 02/09/2016 01:26 PM, Joe Touch wrote:

> 
> So if you have tunnels, fragmentation services are always ultimately
> required.

And when broken (like with my ISP), I had to reduce my MTU to 1442.
Because it looks like fragmentation is failing over any IPv6 connection
I can use. Or perhaps its some kind of IPv6 restriction I can' find.

When Firefox switched to defaulting to IPv6 when it detects you have it
available, all my web results got VERY slow, until I reduced by MTU.

   not an IPv6 expert, just liking to feel I participate :-)

-- 

Doug Royer - (http://DougRoyer.US)
DouglasRoyer@gmail.com
714-989-6135

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email