[Int-area] Re: UDP options [was IP Parcels and Advanced Ju mbos (AJs)]
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.int,gmane.ietf.ipv6,gmane.ietf.tsvwg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> On Sep 27, 2024, at 8:02 PM, Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote: > >> We COULD have a new option with a longer length, but that’s not in our baseline draft. > > Wouldn't that be tricky, because the options follow the whole payload as I understand it? So a JumboUDPgram has to be received in full, however big it is, before the option saying that it's a jumbo can be received and interpreted. I was assuming use of the atomic FRAG approach, in which the UDP length is 8 (not zero) and the options then appear immediately after the UDP header. > Where the udp-options draft says: > >>> The technique has been proposed for deprecation [Jo19]. > > I think you'd better change it to something like: > > The technique is known to be in active use in special situations, so cannot reasonably be deprecated. However, users of this technique cannot simultaneously use UDP options. Yes - we’ve already got that queued up as part of Gorry’s shepherd review. Joe _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]