Re: [Int-area] IPv6 fragmentation for IPv4

Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> Tue, 23 May 2017 18:03 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@isi.edu>
X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB73C129C3F for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 May 2017 11:03:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.002
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 kzru5EIXGR_N for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 May 2017 11:03:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vapor.isi.edu (vapor.isi.edu [128.9.64.64]) (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 D9C571250B8 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 May 2017 11:03:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.189] (cpe-172-250-240-132.socal.res.rr.com [172.250.240.132]) (authenticated bits=0) by vapor.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v4NI2pIE014326 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 23 May 2017 11:03:01 -0700 (PDT)
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>, "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
Cc: "int-area@ietf.org" <int-area@ietf.org>
References: <da864471c7b648eea3d9d93029209660@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com> <CALx6S34Y546UGLvGnxBZ=KdyTRuaTNFE2YMb2Ap1=JgT4fnCzw@mail.gmail.com> <7d5f1e8643c84cd9813342fa31fd8c70@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com> <CALx6S37Hk+DibgX=SNzFjKA4dJvwkffuP0p3SmkxBDo9i1B1FA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
Message-ID: <7669102f-0b34-9abb-0ce7-f47486e77518@isi.edu>
Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 11:02:51 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S37Hk+DibgX=SNzFjKA4dJvwkffuP0p3SmkxBDo9i1B1FA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/Fs1zMt28QneEMOfgOC8o0nB1Nqs>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] IPv6 fragmentation for IPv4
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-area/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 18:03:25 -0000


On 5/23/2017 10:59 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> Introducing extension headers in IPv4 might be opening a can of worms.
> Could this be done in a new IPv4 option?
Only if you want it dropped by routers.

IPv4 doesn't define a flag that says "ignore this option if it isn't
supported".

Joe