Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-rfc1981bis-04.txt> (Path MTU Discovery f

On 2017-2-3, at 9:38, otroan(_at_)employees(_dot_)org wrote:
> > Given that ICMP delivery cannot be assured over the vast majority of paths 
> > in the current Internet, should this document make a recommendation to 
> > implement RFC4821?
> Could you please substantiate that assertion?
Matthew Luckie and Ben Stasiewicz. 2010. Measuring path MTU discovery 
behaviour. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet 
measurement (IMC '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 102-108. 
DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1879141.1879155

PDF here: https://www.caida.org/~mjl/pubs/measuring-pmtud.pdf

"This paper measures PMTUD behaviour for
50,000 popular websites and finds the failure rate in IPv4
is much less than previous studies. We measure the overall
failure rate between 5% and 18%, depending on the MTU of
the constraining link."

5-18% is pretty bad. I would expect that the widespread deployment of CGNs 
since this was published in 2010 to not have improved things.

Lars

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP