Fragmentation Avoidance in DNS
draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation-06
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Active".
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Kazunori Fujiwara , Paul A. Vixie | ||
| Last updated | 2022-06-26 (Latest revision 2021-12-23) | ||
| Replaces | draft-fujiwara-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Reviews |
ARTART Telechat review
(of
-16)
by Barry Leiba
Ready w/nits
TSVART Last Call review
(of
-15)
by Mirja Kühlewind
Ready w/issues
ARTART Last Call review
(of
-15)
by Barry Leiba
Ready w/issues
|
||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | WG Document | |
| Document shepherd | Suzanne Woolf | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | benno@NLnetLabs.nl, swoolf@pir.org |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
EDNS0 enables a DNS server to send large responses using UDP and is widely deployed. Path MTU discovery remains widely undeployed due to security issues, and IP fragmentation has exposed weaknesses in application protocols. Currently, DNS is known to be the largest user of IP fragmentation. It is possible to avoid IP fragmentation in DNS by limiting response size where possible, and signaling the need to upgrade from UDP to TCP transport where necessary. This document proposes to avoid IP fragmentation in DNS.
Authors
Kazunori Fujiwara
Paul A. Vixie
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)