Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion

Tom Perrine <tperrine@scea.com> Tue, 02 September 2014 20:27 UTC

Return-Path: <tperrine@scea.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6D0E1A88DA for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 13:27:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.569
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.569 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, 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 zAQSqwc4Uz0X for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 13:27:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ironport03a.scea.com (ironport03a.scea.com [160.33.44.91]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBB531A88D4 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 13:27:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,451,1406617200"; d="scan'208";a="12076220"
Received: from inbetweener01.scea.com ([160.33.45.195]) by ironport03a.scea.com with ESMTP; 02 Sep 2014 13:27:01 -0700
Received: from toms-mac-pro.am.sony.com (toms-mac-pro.am.sony.com [10.56.5.244]) by inbetweener01.scea.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFEF9F0566 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 13:27:01 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <54062815.2090500@scea.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 13:27:01 -0700
From: Tom Perrine <tperrine@scea.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: v6ops@ietf.org
References: <0D370E74-688B-4EB3-A691-309A03AF20BA@cisco.com> <53FBA174.2040302@isi.edu> <53FBA6E1.90905@bogus.com> <CAPi140PMeM9omtm11+NHa2ywUfof_tE7HknKExtoEb32mm7L_w@mail.gmail.com> <71D0D5E8-80E9-430B-8ED4-16C1F99082CC@cisco.com> <54020ECC.4000000@globis.net> <CAEmG1=redpYUnv9R-uf+cJ4e+iPCf6zMHzVxeKNMGjcC=BjR+Q@mail.gmail.com> <5402C26A.8060304@globis.net> <540626F6.1020103@scea.com>
In-Reply-To: <540626F6.1020103@scea.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/p4lSsI8MNOMiXTlSzyvUazWBS8k
Subject: Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 02 Sep 2014 20:27:03 -0000

Sorry,  total brain fart.

Encapsulation and all the other cases.

Ignore me, I do :-)


On 9/2/14 1:22 PM, Tom Perrine wrote:
> What MTUs are actually (commonly) seen in the wild?
>
> I can only think of less than a dozen that I would expect to see, 
> assuming that the actual MTU is based solely on the underlying network 
> technology.
>
> Is planning and assuming that we'll see each and every possible MTU 
> actually necessary?
>
> I agree that we wouldn't want to artificially limit MTUs to only a few 
> common ones, I mean look how /64s became embedded in silicon...
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops