> On 30 Nov 2018, at 18:33, Joe Touch <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On Nov 30, 2018, at 9:22 AM, Ole Troan <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 30 Nov 2018, at 16:49, Joe Touch <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> 1) the lower down the fragmentation occurs, the less overhead is needed >>> (i.e., when performance is an issue, it’s even more important to fragment >>> as low as possible) >> >> That sounds like an unfounded myth. >> I would think it highly dependent on implementation. > > Reality: > > - every layer down you do it avoids a layer of header in-between *at every > fragment* > ie., IP fragments have only ONE UDP header and ONE application header, but > app-fragments have multiples of both. > > Do the math.
Every ipv6 fragment has an additional 8 byte header. But the network might not be the bottleneck here, and a few more bytes might not matter. As I said it depends. When it comes to performance making blanket statements is rarely a good idea. Ole _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
