Re: Deprecating the FRAG field in SOCKS5 (RFC 1928) in light of RFC 8900

I remember AFT.

Write an I-D saying what you wrote below, it would probably be AD sponsored
after visiting SECDISPATCH@

(The AFT list predates the IETF self-hosting ML, so the archive is maybe also
lost...)

Daniel Vance <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Since the AFT working group has long been concluded, I am not entirely
    > sure which current WG is the most appropriate for this discussion. If
    > there is a more suitable venue, please let me know.

    > I’ve been looking at the UDP ASSOCIATE implementation in SOCKS5 (RFC
    > 1928) and its interaction with modern network path constraints. I’d
    > like to propose that we formally deprecate the FRAG field in the SOCKS5
    > UDP header.

...

    > Given that the current best practice (RFC 8085) is for UDP applications
    > to handle their own MTU constraints or implement PLPMTUD (RFC 8899),
    > there is no longer a valid reason for the SOCKS layer to perform
    > fragmentation.

I'm a fan of PLPMTUD.

--
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT architect   [
]     [email protected]  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [