Dropping IPv6 Fragments
mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp
Thu Oct 4 22:45:17 UTC 2012
Fernando Gont wrote:
> In the real world, such packets are not legitimate, so feel free to drop
> them. draft-ietf-6man-oversized-header-chain formally addresses this issue.
The ID misses the problem of 4->6 translator.
That is, though the ID state:
Entire IPv6 header chain:
All protocol headers starting from the fixed IPv6 header till (and
including) the upper layer protocol header (TCP, UDP, etc. --
assuming there is one of those),
the translator may not have any knowledge on how long "the upper
layer protocol header" is. Thus, the requirement of the ID is
impossible to enforce.
Moreover, a 68B IPv4 fragment of some packet with 60B upper layer
protocol header can not be translated to IPv6.
In theory, with 60B IPv4 header, a 68B IPv4 fragment can't even
contain an entire TCP header.
So, the requirement of the ID should be to require only the first
8B of the upper layer protocol header.
All the (pseudo) transport protocols working over IPv4 is
designed to identify transport identity with the first 8B
of transport headers.
>> Likewise with the acl I have the property that the initial packet has
>> all the info in it while the fragment does not.
> You're talking about initial-fragment vs non-initial fragments? -- If
> so, in theory *both* might be missing the upper layer information.
Yes, that is one of an annoying point of IPv6.
More information about the NANOG