> Are you seeing IXPs with MTU steps today where PMTUD will be actually > a thing? You'd need to send a packet into the IXP that the next-ISP > router will not be able to forward *in* the ISP network to trigger a > ICMP packet with an IXP-owned source address...
Only when people do stupid things (like: Me some time ago, having it stopped since). So, yes, this is a somewhat limited issue anyway. > But I'm not sure I understand what you are argueing for, here? > > - announce and accept the /26, to not break PMTUD > - *not* announce the /26, because, RIB/FIB will explode? I am arguing for: - Let's not tell IXPs whether they should announce their peering LAN - Let's certainly _not_ do anything that might lead to people feeling the need to announce /26|/64 to eBGP or in any form normalize that, because then RIB/FIB will explode eventually. With best regards, Tobias -- Dr.-Ing. Tobias Fiebig T +31 616 80 98 99 M tob...@fiebig.nl _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list -- grow@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to grow-le...@ietf.org
