>-----Original Message----- >From: Ole Troan [mailto:ichiroumak...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ole Troan >Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 2:32 PM >To: Hemant Singh (shemant) >Cc: Brian E Carpenter; softwires@ietf.org >Subject: Re: [Softwires] MTU issue for 6RD (and 6to4)
>Hemant, >> It's not as simple as that. What if the 6rd functionality is >> running on >> the access concentrator like a CMTS in cable? In a cable deployment, >> due to the added len from docsis headers, the MTU in cable between the >> home and the cable access concentrator is actually less than the >> typical >> MTU for Ethernet LANs. So do we really have to specify an MTU for the >> 6rd specification? >in that case the IPv4 MTU is wrong too right? Yes. >the 6rd assumption is that the IPv4 WAN interface MTU is correct and >the MTU in the SP network is well managed. I'd prefer that to be the >default as opposed to a fixed value of 1280. with a default of 1280 it >appears you would need 6rd specific provisioning if one wants a >different value. Totally agree. That is why I said why even bother specifying any value for MTU default in the 6rd document when the default has to be equal to the IP4 MTU. Other documents have got to exist that define MTU values for tunnels. Hemant _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list Softwires@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
