option 212 for 6RD

[Mikael Abrahamsson]

On Sat, 19 Jan 2013, Erik Kline wrote:

> But if the tunnel pretends the MTU is 1500 and fragments such a packet 
> into two packets of 1480 + 20 (the outer protocol is IPv4, after all), 
> what is the problem?  Are people worried about the Segmentation and 
> Reassembly workload on the BR or something?

Oooh, yes, I definitely don't what the BR to do any kind of re-assembly. 
That'll limit the number of platforms that can be used for 6RD severely, a 
lot of the good price/performance ones are stateless and do not do 
re-assembly. Strictly speaking, having them to MSS adjust is a performance 
problem there already. Think Cisco 7600, hardware forwarding is good, CPU 
resources to manipulate packets is limited.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se