[139303] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: v6 Avian Carriers?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Chad Dailey)
Fri Apr 1 21:34:56 2011
In-Reply-To: <5823114E-7E5F-4874-85C1-947F58AB0937@delong.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 20:34:52 -0500
From: Chad Dailey <nanog@thedaileyplanet.com>
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Reply-To: nanog@thedaileyplanet.com
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Swallows have MTU issues.
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 8:27 PM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
>
> On Apr 1, 2011, at 10:45 AM, Steven Bellovin wrote:
>
> >
> > On Apr 1, 2011, at 8:41 11AM, Sachs, Marcus Hans (Marc) wrote:
> >
> >> 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?
> >>
> >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6214/
> >>
> >
> > 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.
> >>
> >
> >
> > --Steve Bellovin, https://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 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
>
>
>
>
