On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Pekka Savola wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Vishwas Manral wrote:
I think that is the minimum Link MTU and not the smallest size non-last
fragment.
Can you point me to the RFC/ draft which says what you stated?
This is a good point. Let me copy a part of Elwyn Davies's message on the
list on September:
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 23:14:26 +0100
From: Elwyn Davies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Bob Hinden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brian Haberman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: Taking RFC2460 (base IPv6) spec to full standard - issues
outstanding
....
[outstanding issues in core IPv6 spec before moving to full standard]
? Fragment reassembly algorithm - should explicitly forbid overlapped
fragments and possibly require that non-final fragments are (say) at
least 1024 bytes.
The minimum IPv6 fragment size is not specified AFAICT.
Let me copy my answer to question of Elwyn:
According the RFC2460 the minimal MTU must be 1280. So Each fragments -
except the last fragment packet should be at least 1280. - this is
implicitly written in RFC2460 spec: "The lengths of the fragments must be
chosen such that the resulting fragment packets fit within the MTU of the
path to the packets' destination(s)." I understand this, that each
fragment packet should be aligned to MTU, which is at least 1280.
I think it is wise to make it more explicit.
Janos Mohacsi
Network Engineer, Research Associate
NIIF/HUNGARNET, HUNGARY
Key 00F9AF98: 8645 1312 D249 471B DBAE 21A2 9F52 0D1F 00F9 AF98
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
