Re: [Int-area] [IPv6] FW: I-D Action: draft-templin-intarea-ipid-ext-04.txt

2023-09-01 Thread Templin (US), Fred L
Tom, see below: > Hi Fred, > > I don't see how the Hop-by-Hop Option can work. In IPv6, fragmentation > is always end to end so a Hop-by-Hop Option really isn't appropriate. > It should be a Destination Option, but then we'd have to have DestOps > before the Frag header but after any Routing Head

Re: [Int-area] [IPv6] FW: I-D Action: draft-templin-intarea-ipid-ext-04.txt

2023-09-01 Thread Templin (US), Fred L
Tom, a correction: > This started out as a destination option *after* the Fragment header but > *before* > the Routing header according to the order stipulated in RFC8200. I meant a destination option *before* both the routing and fragment headers per Section 4.1 of RFC8200. But regardless, I no

Re: [Int-area] [IPv6] FW: I-D Action: draft-templin-intarea-ipid-ext-04.txt

2023-09-01 Thread Templin (US), Fred L
Tom, it might also be helpful to think of the new HBH option as a "Don't Fragment (DF)" flag for IPv6. If the option is absent, then it is the equivalent of DF=1 and the network is not permitted to fragment. If the option is present, then it is DF=0 and the network can fragment if necessary. Fr

Re: [Int-area] [IPv6] FW: I-D Action: draft-templin-intarea-ipid-ext-04.txt

2023-09-01 Thread Tom Herbert
On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 8:17 AM Templin (US), Fred L wrote: > > Tom, a correction: > > > This started out as a destination option *after* the Fragment header but > > *before* > > the Routing header according to the order stipulated in RFC8200. > > I meant a destination option *before* both the rou

Re: [Int-area] [EXTERNAL] Re: [IPv6] FW: I-D Action: draft-templin-intarea-ipid-ext-04.txt

2023-09-01 Thread Templin (US), Fred L
Tom, > Fred, > > I'm still not seeing it. If an extended ID is used then AFAIK this > would mean that in order for a receiver to correctly reassemble the > packet it MUST process the extended ID. There is a test that the sender uses to determine whether the receiver recognizes the option. > Th

Re: [Int-area] [EXTERNAL] Re: [IPv6] FW: I-D Action: draft-templin-intarea-ipid-ext-04.txt

2023-09-01 Thread Tom Herbert
On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 8:51 AM Templin (US), Fred L wrote: > > Tom, > > > Fred, > > > > I'm still not seeing it. If an extended ID is used then AFAIK this > > would mean that in order for a receiver to correctly reassemble the > > packet it MUST process the extended ID. > > There is a test that th

Re: [Int-area] [IPv6] FW: I-D Action: draft-templin-intarea-ipid-ext-04.txt

2023-09-01 Thread Templin (US), Fred L
Tom, I do not want to add a new type of Fragment Header for either IPv6 or IPv4; I like the existing IPv6 Fragment Header the way it is. And for IPv6, I want intermediate nodes to have an early "DF" indication without first having to parse deeply into the packet to see if a Fragment Header is pr

[Int-area] FW: I-D Action: draft-templin-intarea-ipid-ext-05.txt

2023-09-01 Thread Templin (US), Fred L
-Original Message- From: I-D-Announce On Behalf Of internet-dra...@ietf.org Sent: Friday, September 01, 2023 1:10 PM To: i-d-annou...@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action: draft-templin-intarea-ipid-ext-05.txt Internet-Draft draft-templin-intarea-ipid-ext-05.txt is now available. Title: Id