Re: [v6ops] Minimum MTU size
Dragos Ilie <dragos.ilie@gmail.com> Tue, 31 January 2012 10:40 UTC
Return-Path: <dragos.ilie@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13E5221F867D for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 02:40:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.466
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.466 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.133, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uWekdSrZp6Fn for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 02:40:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com (mail-vw0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8843521F8652 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 02:40:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by vbbfr13 with SMTP id fr13so25728vbb.31 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 02:40:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=b6kh2y6tsNM/Exzqy6OCAYfshPYxBRDC8CKS2eYYZPo=; b=EBYujBGY6cOFegsOpC/MT/ohJF5S3Dl8l51c2IHmRzHKOUiFBO0f1IZwmWb2flGj5h NDInF+bkT2+zlaygFx2hlyTKc3Xeee8RuGiFX8xZv6Mp3fD4Wsa6V8cqYDJXTF/tzWT0 DZe3RiMkTDkqZUNM3TU8suV3eFuMPMLO7oESg=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.24.35 with SMTP id r3mr9931258vdf.81.1328006439092; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 02:40:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.52.21.244 with HTTP; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 02:40:39 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <201201311017.q0VAHxWd053879@givry.fdupont.fr>
References: <CAOLNa-fXX9+qY8Sw-r9WTq6y7wSxNS-XZCfrGXZHmA731x1i9Q@mail.gmail.com> <201201311017.q0VAHxWd053879@givry.fdupont.fr>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 11:40:39 +0100
Message-ID: <CAOLNa-cTBwriS4LBP3KAVUdoM9m_B1HPV8zJ-S9-j6MOBfBkBQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dragos Ilie <dragos.ilie@gmail.com>
To: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Minimum MTU size
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 10:40:40 -0000
Thank you! That is what I was looking for. Regards, Dragos Ilie On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr> wrote: > In your previous mail you wrote: > >> I am trying to find out the underlaying reason to select a 1280 bytes >> minimum MTU for IPv6 (as opposed to any other value such as 1400 or >> 1500 bytes). For example, I heard that the reason for selecting a >> 576-bytes min MTU for IPv4 has to do with packet sizes for DNS and >> X.25. I would appreciated it if somebody can explain the motivation >> for the 1280-byte choice in the case of IPv6 or point me to relevant >> information sources. > > => first the min MTU for IPv4 is 68 bytes (maximum sized header + 8), > not 576 which is the minimum size for the reassembly (1500 for IPv6). > The choice of 1280 was for 1024 of data (aka application payload) and > 256 for headers. > > Regards > > Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr
- [v6ops] Minimum MTU size Dragos Ilie
- Re: [v6ops] Minimum MTU size Francis Dupont
- Re: [v6ops] Minimum MTU size Dragos Ilie
- Re: [v6ops] Minimum MTU size Brian E Carpenter