A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Internet Area Working Group WG of the IETF.
Title : IP Tunnels in the Internet Architecture
Authors : Joe Touch
Mark
Ron, it is just a drop in the bucket compared with the amount of discussion
since
"Fragmentation Considered Harmful (1987)". But, I think we now clearly see a
case where fragmentation is *required*.
Thanks - Fred
> -Original Message-
> From: Int-area [mailto:int-area-boun...@ietf.org]
Folks,
To the best of my knowledge, 508 messages have been posted to this mailing list
regarding draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile.
I wonder if that is a WG record?
Ron
Juniper Business Use Only
> On Sep 12, 2019, at 6:57 AM, Templin (US), Fred L
> wrote:
>
>>> IPv4 with a small PMTU also comes to mind, as discussed in Section 3.2.2 of
>>> RFC 4213:
>>>
>>> In this case, the IPv6 layer has to "see" a link
>>> layer with an MTU of 1280 bytes and the encapsulator has to use IPv4
> -Original Message-
> From: Int-area [mailto:int-area-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Templin (US),
> Fred L
> Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2019 6:31 AM
> To: Brian E Carpenter ; Bob Hinden
>
> Cc: int-area@ietf.org; Suresh Krishnan
> Subject: Re: [Int-area] Discussion about Section
Bob,
> -Original Message-
> From: Bob Hinden [mailto:bob.hin...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2019 3:59 PM
> To: Templin (US), Fred L
> Cc: Bob Hinden ; Geoff Huston ; Joe
> Touch ; int-area@ietf.org;
> Suresh Krishnan
> Subject: Re: [Int-area] Discussion about Section
Brian,
> -Original Message-
> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2019 4:14 PM
> To: Bob Hinden ; Templin (US), Fred L
>
> Cc: int-area@ietf.org; Suresh Krishnan
> Subject: Re: [Int-area] Discussion about Section 6.1 in
>
