IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IETF Last Call conclusion for draft-ietf-6man-rfc2460bis-08

Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com> Tue, 04 April 2017 13:56 UTC

Return-Path: <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
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 92366126DEE; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 06:56:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 3yCaJ_VXcXaq; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 06:56:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from usplmg21.ericsson.net (usplmg21.ericsson.net [198.24.6.65]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 854E212869B; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 06:56:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c6180641-417ff700000058cf-45-58e35fbd5744
Received: from EUSAAHC006.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.90]) by (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 8B.9C.22735.DBF53E85; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 10:56:31 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from EUSAAMB107.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.124]) by EUSAAHC006.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.90]) with mapi id 14.03.0339.000; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 09:56:37 -0400
From: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
CC: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, "Leddy, John" <John_Leddy@comcast.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-6man-rfc2460bis.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-6man-rfc2460bis.all@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: IETF Last Call conclusion for draft-ietf-6man-rfc2460bis-08
Thread-Topic: IETF Last Call conclusion for draft-ietf-6man-rfc2460bis-08
Thread-Index: AQHSnTZv86cghjjmGk6P6rsvHH5Q4qGssVmAgAD+BwCAAAesgIAAIVmAgAAFgwCAAASPgIAAEkGAgABB5oCAAAHpgIAAAteAgAACGICAAAp2gIABEiqAgAVOxgCAAHSFAIAAcTyAgAAHDACAAAmFgA==
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2017 13:56:37 +0000
Message-ID: <49627D61-E761-4739-A349-C9639F0D6350@ericsson.com>
References: <599257D7-532D-4512-929B-D124623EAF35@ericsson.com> <6B662F87-B0E6-4613-B406-8A22CA95DFA5@cisco.com> <4917F161-2EC8-43E0-AF4C-BFAEE44A492C@cable.comcast.com> <198e3116-5448-2fdf-4da7-4811a0133f05@gmail.com> <50E4A84C-F0ED-45ED-AA89-5713CBD8F9E0@gmail.com> <5aebc8ed-f873-94e9-1ae4-dab7b3a8ebef@gmail.com> <CA+b+ERk8kHWyBY3GPp21-pgrL_SsShaLkrn4UdecFeQPYamSEg@mail.gmail.com> <A0F19A98-7DBE-4616-B949-529ED2A81D62@ericsson.com> <CA+b+ERk_cKGB6a0SQd560cMiOzT4KbSic6fCCwQWrhNkNEcO3Q@mail.gmail.com> <76ABEAE0-6A89-4C69-82ED-968F949A3B19@employees.org> <CA+b+ERmqpRuw0z4ZQkhNYfEqGvqEJKYwM0hkuWg8dZrYXT4DdQ@mail.gmail.com> <FCFFDDCF-7A53-41E2-B414-53E568C92B35@employees.org> <CA+b+ERmELF1p_5vX_nqhB58Bm8c34N6=kkijuCRYkfkQcfKneQ@mail.gmail.com> <0ae6ba21-0529-e9ca-ab74-b18a85acad4a@gmail.com> <CA+b+ERm7vO-ZpSHKLvY+BfgWpMa7+abKR6BFnXkgUuUPEXYVEg@mail.gmail.com> <931f29e0-a029-2098-38c9-bc65e43ca0ab@si6networks.com> <CA+b+ERk2E43abOjYQSLQNpYu7OUunZhMzrHdaNxndWEujPa9Qw@mail.gmail.com> <ec10ed2a-a187-4539-d62e-67d331881887@gmail.com> <CA+b+ERnowxo2ynO9QomXMOEwnQjVJB703NsNUzW9qACOco8CVg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+b+ERnowxo2ynO9QomXMOEwnQjVJB703NsNUzW9qACOco8CVg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.11]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_63BBCF24-C889-42DE-ABE0-68654718A7D1"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrPIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPlO7++McRBp8vslu0XdzHZPHq7TU2 iyer3rBZPNs4n8Xi5dn3TBZLFyxnsmha2MTswO5xvbOF2WPnrLvsHkuW/GTy2L1xAZPHh0M9 7AGsUVw2Kak5mWWpRfp2CVwZa1/1MBVs8a3Y1/2HrYHxk3sXIyeHhICJRFtrH2MXIxeHkMAG RomdS6+zQTjLGCX2zTjECFLFBlS1YednJhBbREBVovPEI2aQImaBmUwSj24fYAZJCAt4SEza dI0FoshTYt3GwywgRSIgky7f+g/UzcHBIqAi8fBGFojJK2AvsfSID8SyXxwSC3uugM3hFAiU +Hh9P9gcRgExie+n1oAtZhYQl7j1ZD4TxNkiEg8vnmaDsEUlXj7+xwphK0l8/D2fHeK4KYwS pxesByviFRCUODnzCcsERpFZSGbNQlY3C0kdRFGSxKkN/6FsbYllC18zQ9iaEvu7l2MR15Do /DaRFcI2lXh99CMjhG0tMePXQTYIW1FiSvdD9gWM3KsYOUqLC3Jy040MNzECo/6YBJvjDsa9 vZ6HGAU4GJV4eBVkH0UIsSaWFVfmHmJUAWp9tGH1BUYplrz8vFQlEd6YRY8jhHhTEiurUovy 44tKc1KLDzFKc7AoifO+K78QISSQnliSmp2aWpBaBJNl4uCUamAUWXi1eeu/5KmhzAe10xn8 D0xIcX60bg139MKcXQfqOfpVAl3tdq24pVTNXPj7K2OhAMvHtDyFivkh0W4frX9y2L+bxCJ1 /Nua5z8/Z68uCHG+YSGyY4aENtcel861j6wOzr1mlCJ2OdpfI6R86rdEmZVrF3aYl37gCpmQ MuPwu80OvsE37l5QYinOSDTUYi4qTgQAvaEWOgIDAAA=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/vRu1LP6eMST0CiuMEf7bZSiPuSg>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Tue, 04 Apr 2017 13:56:42 -0000

Hi Robert,

> On Apr 4, 2017, at 9:22 AM, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi Brian,
> 
> > In any case if we see this entire thread the only technical concern with EH
> > insertion was MTU. And how that issue is solved when you do additional IPv6
> > header encap ?
> 
> PMTUD applies to the path between source A (encapsulator) and destination B
> (decapsulator). If you decapsulate at B and the encapsulate again, PMTUD
> applies to the path between B (encapsulator) and C (decapsulator). They are
> completely independent; it's a new packet. PMTUD doesn't occur between A
> and C at all.
> 
> 
> ​Are you saying that it is "legal" to fragment IPv6 packet by a router at the encapsulation point in the network ? 

> 
> That would be news to me. 

Yes. It is legal. Please take a look at section 7 of RFC2473.

Regards
Suresh

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email