RE: [RRG] Perplexing PMTUD and packet length observations

["Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>]

>> If lots of hosts are sending long packets with DF=0, we need to cope
>> with then in any map-encap scheme.

Lots of hosts sending long packets with DF=0 does not
necessarily cause problems for ITRs/ETRs, if that's what
you mean. As long as the ITR configures a large-enough
MTU on its Internet-facing interface, then it won't be
stuck having to do a lot of fragmentation - but some
other router(s) further down the road might be. And,
the ETR will not be responsible for reassembling; the
final destination will.

>Like I've been saying for a long time, reducing the user-visible MTU  
>of the internet is not an acceptable approach.

SEAL fixes that. What unacceptable is a mechanism that
requires reliable and secure delivery of ICMPs from
anonymous nodes on the Internet.

Fred
fred.l.templin@boeing.com
    

--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg