Subject: Self-Describing-Padding, RFC 1990

From: "Daniel Feldman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 17:21:15 +0200

>  -----Original Message-----
> From: 	Naim Far  
> Sent:	Monday, August 12, 2002 11:51 AM
> To:	[email-masked]'
> Subject:	Self-Describing-Padding, RFC 1990
> 
> Hi,
> 	There something that I don't understand with RFC 1990:
> 		In section 2 (General Overview) it is specifically
written that the option of No Self-Describing-Padding has to be manually
configured within the encapsulation of the packets, while in section
3.1. (Padding Considerations) it's written "Systems that support the
multilink protocol SHOULD implement Self- Describing-Padding". I think
it's a mistake in the document.

---

From: James Carlson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 10:29:52 -0400

> it's a mistake in the document.

I think you're confusing two separate things.

The packets at the bundle level (that is, before fragmentation and
after reassembly) must not be padded in any way.  That's what the note
in section 2 means.

The note in section 3.1 is referring to how the fragments themselves
are actually carried on the links.  These may be padded if necessary,
and if any padding at all is needed, then SDP must be used.

In other words, padding is a per-link issue, not a per-bundle issue.

(All that said, implementation of SDP and the need for padding at all
are so rare that doing without is probably the best course for most
implementors.)

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking         <[email-masked]>
SUN Microsystems / 1 Network Drive         71.234W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.497N   Fax +1 781 442 1677