IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Non-Last Small IPv6 Fragments

Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> Sun, 13 January 2019 20:03 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0D03128D52 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Jan 2019 12:03:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-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 IaCuxgP3CK-2 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Jan 2019 12:03:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bugle.employees.org (accordion.employees.org [IPv6:2607:7c80:54:3::74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 359DC127598 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 13 Jan 2019 12:03:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.10.191] (30.51-175-112.customer.lyse.net [51.175.112.30]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by bugle.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 31FAFFECBEA4; Sun, 13 Jan 2019 20:03:33 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: Non-Last Small IPv6 Fragments
From: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16C101)
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S35QKOqn_Ywh9yzm1JDA8Xnp7fLPPmXUvomvz_xOZP8bfg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2019 21:03:30 +0100
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <EC9CC5FE-5215-4105-8A34-B3F123D574B9@employees.org>
References: <CAOSSMjV0Vazum5OKztWhAhJrjLjXc5w5YGxdzHgbzi7YVSk7rg@mail.gmail.com> <0e0c3141-889e-ff60-2787-2889b3a9af6b@si6networks.com> <748DA428-5AB2-4487-A4FB-F2DABF5BF8BE@thehobsons.co.uk> <8b43af81-1c49-5cea-6472-97703674e661@si6networks.com> <CAN-Dau1HwG5RndacpSA+si+zKuTdpSvA=QA1A11A==rMNe=4+w@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S35KNhV2gFp9OdU+M1zy5WUuEAEvXkDXNDWWxi7uQ4e_cw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN-Dau0rTdiiF2SjByxcMG6nhPCEjUH2pYBCOeK_FSGJ_ucDQw@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S34AyV9OpvnjQhQc56n5vfeVgU5Zd3kheP0g+XvsMbBV9g@mail.gmail.com> <1b2e318e-1a9f-bb5d-75a5-04444c42ef20@si6networks.com> <CALx6S37TJr++fC=pVoeS=mrO1fHc4gL_Wtu-XkVTswzs2XxXCA@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S36V7vrVyoTP0G6+S5XeFNB3KWS5UaNnVi20xogRERdCfg@mail.gmail.com> <973A1649-55F6-4D97-A97F-CEF555A4D397@employees.org> <CALx6S34YbBe8xBod3VsWVO33TpZcdxh2uV1vaO8Z_NKnVXp66g@mail.gmail.com> <A3C3F9C0-0A07-41AF-9671-B9E486CB8246@employees.org> <AEA47E27-C0CB-4ABE-8ADE-51E9D599EF8F@gmail.com> <6aae7888-46a4-342d-1d76-10f8b50cebc4@gmail.com> <CALx6S35 QKOqn_Ywh9yzm1JDA8Xnp7fLPPmXUvomvz_xOZP8bfg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/d0B_1Tod37raiSFz8mIyOyQ2OEQ>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2019 20:03:36 -0000


> On 13 Jan 2019, at 20:48, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> wrote:
> 
> Frankly, such recommendations are not being
> made because of deficient host implementations, because of
> intermediate nodes that don't handle fragmentation properly. Narrowing
> the requirements to make them more practical may be a good step
> getting these devices to properly support fragmentation

That’s highly unlikely given that the problem is that the packet is split in multiple pieces, which might take different paths. 

Let’s fix path MTU discovery. There’s no fix for fragmentation.

Cheers 
Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email