
Large UDP packets in IPv6  [pdf] - liotier
https://ripe72.ripe.net/wp-content/uploads/presentations/67-2016-05-23-bigipv6.pdf
======
mino
This talk from Geoff Huston seems great (as usual) but it has not been
presented yet at the conference. You can connect to the live streaming [0]
around 14pm CET on Wed 25th, or watch it later from the presentation archives
[1]. I suggest you also check out the other two talks he's giving at the conf.

[0] [https://ripe72.ripe.net/live/main](https://ripe72.ripe.net/live/main)

[1] [https://ripe72.ripe.net/programme/meeting-
plan/ipv6-wg/](https://ripe72.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/ipv6-wg/)

~~~
okket
While waiting I can recommend this Packet Pushers podcast episode where Geoff
Huston takes on IPv6 and the future of the networking:

[http://packetpushers.net/podcast/podcasts/show-275-future-
of...](http://packetpushers.net/podcast/podcasts/show-275-future-of-
networking-geoff-huston/)

~~~
mino
I second this. I like when he points out that available entropy in CGNAT
(ipv4+proto+port) is larger than what available in IPv6.

------
RUBwkVjwLsDKgPw
As someone who works in the application layer, the recommendation to have a
fast failover to tcp from udp seems silly. Shouldn't the recommendation be to
keep packet sizes below 1280?

~~~
aidenn0
Oh, whatever happened to SCTP?

~~~
detaro
The reality that to much stuff in networks (mostly firewalls, NAT and other
middleboxes like that) only understands the basics (TCP, UDP, random bits of
ICMP) and drops SCTP. You can do SCTP over UDP, or use it in networks you can
control and fix, but not reliably as-is over random internet connections. So
we now have HTTP2 and other protocols now reinvent parallel streams instead of
swapping to SCTP, but that's how it is.

