Hello, I have suggested text for the draft to address some previous comments made on the list.
Last paragraph in section 4.3: "This problem does not occur in stateful firewalls or Network Address Translation (NAT) devices. Such devices maintain state so that they can afford identical treatment to each fragment that belongs to a packet. Note, however, that stateful firewalls and NAT devices impose the external requirement that all packets of a flow and fragments of a packets for a flow must traverse the same stateful device; stateless devices do not force this requirement." Section 4.5: "IP fragmentation causes problems for some routers that support Equal Cost Multipath (ECMP). Many routers that support ECMP execute the algorithm described in Section 4.4 in order to perform flow based forwarding; therefore, the exhibit they same problematic behaviors described in Section 4.4. In IPv6, the flow label may alternatively used as input to the algorithm as opposed to parsing the transport layer of packets to discern port numbers. The flow label should be consistently set for a packets of flow including fragments, such that a device does not need to parse packets beyond the IP header for the purposes of ECMP." Add to section 7.3: "Routers SHOULD use IPv6 flow label for ECMP routing as described in [RFC6438]." _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
