Paul Vixie wrote:
> likewise. we should not avoid fragmentation in this particular way. that is,
> we can use persistent TCP, or we can avoid sending large messages by shaping
> their contents better (smaller signatures, less additional data).
Like this?
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dn
Moin!
On 22 Jan 2019, at 9:50, Davey Song wrote:
It is not rare. It is just under the water. You cannot run a ship
unaware of it, especially towards IPv6-only future. Here are some
pointer and number are given:
[1] presents a 28.26% ~ 55.23% packets drop rate for IPv6 fragements.
[2] reports
Thanks for all commenter's, I appreciate your frankness and vote based on your
technical sense. I understand your push back especially considering the DNS
camel stuff. I try to reply some of comments here.
Some people argues on the problem statement of this draft.
> Peter: Meanwhile, we have no
