IPv4 Reassembly Errors at High Data Rates
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 05 and is now closed.
(Lars Eggert) Yes
(Sam Hartman) Yes
(David Kessens) (was Discuss) Yes
(Magnus Westerlund) Yes
(Jari Arkko) No Objection
(Ross Callon) No Objection
Comment (2006-12-14 for -)
I agree with Dave Kessens that the title and abstract need to be changed to make it clear that this is really only talking about IP Fragmentation problems for extremely high bandwidth communication (which may indeed be quite important for supercomputer centers, but are not applicable for normal Internet users). However, I don't see any need to enter a "discuss" because Dave already has one for the same issue and I agree with Dave's proposed solution of changing the title and abstract to make it clear what the scope of this document actually is.
(Brian Carpenter) No Objection
Comment (2006-12-13 for -)
5. Implications ... IPv6 is less vulnerable to this type of problem, since its fragment header contains a 32-bit identification field [RFC2460]. Mis- association will only be a problem at packet rates 65536 times higher than for IPv4. Should note that IPv6 fragmentation only occurs e2e and there is no DF bit; hence errors caused by non-respect of the DF bit cannot occur. From Gen-ART reviewer Robert Sparks: "Some comments from a personal preference point-of-view: Consider changing the title to something describing the results directly - make this more likely to find when someone in the future uses the rfc-index to find issues with reassembly. Tuning the abstract to reflect the results rather than the consequenses of the results might also help draw eyes to the document, but I'm not sure how many people filter/choose documents based on the abstract text. On the other hand, a lot of the people you probably want to reach have been de-sensitized to fragmentation/congestion klaxons - your message might get out faster without them. "