1 Agree. 2 Can't say. 3 more than likely. 4 heaps of routers are already
doing this, for masquerading due to the v4 address shortage.
> .. stuff...
If it led to cleaner, faster, sexier-in-evening-wear networking for
hosts, I'd be more than happy to see the burden for fragmentation
shifted to a router or gateway (I still stubbornly persist in drawing a
big black line between the those two - forgive).
I'm not totally sure how this would work in practical situations..I keep
my MTU/MRU pretty damn small on most of my data-links, ethernet
excepted. Just thinking about the possibilities of fragging in places
that there might not be a compliant reassembler between two arbitrary
parties. Scary thought. Guess that comes down to PMTU discovery
(something which, I might add doesn't run through certain NAT solutions
from our solar friends, due to the mangling of icmp...that's OT, though)
I think this wants some good hard thinking through if nobody can see a
good reason against it....because if there isn't a good obvious reason
against it there may well be a good _non_ obvious reason lurking in
there somewhere that won't turn up until later...and it's so
_depressing_ to scrap something after you've invested a lot of time on
it.
D
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/