IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Thu, 20 October 2011 13:17 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.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 6ACFC21F8B47 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 06:17:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.976
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 NrvLbU-z4J3y for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 06:17:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [216.239.44.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D32E521F8B3E for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 06:17:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hpaq3.eem.corp.google.com (hpaq3.eem.corp.google.com [172.25.149.3]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p9KDH3gs002315 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 06:17:04 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1319116624; bh=jB9tTCWVjQbtOvEfr4iXf9G1ZOY=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=CBQ45Sa7sgsX9GlMKRdM+CGNyfMkcMOaX1VybRrnBbgDaQ7JNqSHrIYR7ui9QerpN mgXeKqmQt4ics/JrzK8Vw==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=dkim-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date: message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; b=xmmGwtg9Gblm96oSwRkOFQO0NebSbpQg76FYruHcwt9t5Z7THgLSqeAC55gHxUVZ5 81XD6LHOFmEx3wvttF6XQ==
Received: from qyk7 (qyk7.prod.google.com [10.241.83.135]) by hpaq3.eem.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p9KD9s62025434 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 06:17:02 -0700
Received: by qyk7 with SMTP id 7so4440295qyk.3 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 06:16:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; bh=w99AxuXd7mQ46pkcGHJumk5WLXcrAqgJUPxI+ThuyvQ=; b=dl/WrQvItx1AMLnDfufCEr2uywhiEY/A+IOqcRbFsjC4+D1P/C/vzS5E/38X1qbzva OebSCMY+aSSb+vYzbSwA==
Received: by 10.150.206.6 with SMTP id d6mr9816978ybg.60.1319116618379; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 06:16:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.150.206.6 with SMTP id d6mr9816956ybg.60.1319116618124; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 06:16:58 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.150.96.7 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 06:16:37 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <39D5D616-6E56-46B1-B773-437184567E60@employees.org>
References: <4E974F1A.2030008@forthnetgroup.gr> <5B6B2B64C9FE2A489045EEEADDAFF2C3030A4156@XMB-RCD-109.cisco.com> <5B6B2B64C9FE2A489045EEEADDAFF2C303130390@XMB-RCD-109.cisco.com> <4E98CCB2.2050100@forthnetgroup.gr> <5B6B2B64C9FE2A489045EEEADDAFF2C3031303D8@XMB-RCD-109.cisco.com> <4E994515.6020204@forthnetgroup.gr> <5B6B2B64C9FE2A489045EEEADDAFF2C303130B54@XMB-RCD-109.cisco.com> <5B6B2B64C9FE2A489045EEEADDAFF2C303130C12@XMB-RCD-109.cisco.com> <4E9E8706.6050006@forthnetgroup.gr> <39D5D616-6E56-46B1-B773-437184567E60@employees.org>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 22:16:37 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr3SRRjk4fjg1WkUZSQ6rRT2+dY5p-wjtEiA5SFvx4kqGA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000e0cd404d070ccec04afbac516"
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org, draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis
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: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 13:17:10 -0000

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 17:29, Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> wrote:

> should the MTU be different than the default LAN link MTU and if so why?
>

Yes, if the upstream MTU is lower than the default LAN link MTU. Otherwise
you'll experience latency issues whenever you connect to a new host on the
Internet.

should internal to the home communication also be restricted in MTU?
>

If possible, no. If it's not possible to do this and still meet the above,
then the above should take precedence.

if the MTU is set e.g. equal to the WAN MTU, what do you do in the case of a
> routed home? how do you propagate the MTU inside the network?
> what if there are conflicts?
>

I'll pull an Ole and say that case is out of scope because 6204 only covers
the case of one CE router.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email