IP Fragmentation - Not reliable over the Internet?

• Subject: IP Fragmentation - Not reliable over the Internet?
• From: emile.aben at ripe.net (Emile Aben)
• Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2013 06:58:53 +0200
• In-reply-to: <m2eh9ai0bl.wl%[email protected]>
• References: <6e53114d968f40f097a83640d90f9acf@BN1PR03MB171.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <m2ob8fjspp.wl%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <m2eh9ai0bl.wl%[email protected]>

On 31/08/2013 13:09, Randy Bush wrote:
>>>> i wonder if this is correlated with the high number of probes being
>>>> behind nats.
>>
>> Maybe this provides a bit of insight:
>> From a test last week from all RIPE Atlas probes to a single "known
>> good" MTU 1500 host I compared probes where I had both a ping test with
>> ipv4.len 1020 and ipv4.len 1502.
>> behind NAT probes: 12%  1020 bytes ping worked while 1502 failed
>> non-NATted probes:  6%    ""
> 
> this needs publication on your adventure game of a web site, please.  it
> will seriously 'inform' some discussion going back and forth on ietf
> lists.

This is now published on RIPE Labs. For the adventurous:
https://labs.ripe.net/Members/emileaben/ripe-atlas-packet-size-matters

regards,
Emile Aben
RIPE NCC

• Follow-Ups:
  • IP Fragmentation - Not reliable over the Internet?
    • From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush)

• Prev by Date: Someone from PCCW NOC here ?
• Next by Date: IP Fragmentation - Not reliable over the Internet?
• Previous by thread: Final Agenda Published - NANOG 59
• Next by thread: IP Fragmentation - Not reliable over the Internet?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread