[139302] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: v6 Avian Carriers?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Fri Apr 1 21:31:10 2011
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <872325B0-BD3D-4211-8474-EFAE6BDC6F9E@cs.columbia.edu>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 18:27:23 -0700
To: Steven Bellovin <smb@cs.columbia.edu>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Apr 1, 2011, at 10:45 AM, Steven Bellovin wrote:
>=20
> On Apr 1, 2011, at 8:41 11AM, Sachs, Marcus Hans (Marc) wrote:
>=20
>> I was wondering which April 1st this would happen on. Now I know. =
So if a v6 carrier swallows a v4 datagram does that count as packet loss =
or tunneling?
>>=20
>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6214/
>>=20
>=20
> I was disappointed in this RFC -- Section 3.1 didn't include the =
proper discussion of the difference between African and European avian =
carriers, and we know what happens if that question is asked at the =
wrong time.
>>=20
>=20
>=20
> --Steve Bellovin, https://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
That applies to swallows. I'm not sure pidgeons pose the same issue. I =
think in general, swallows
provide poor platforms for avian transport of IP datagrams.
Owen
