Re: (ngtrans) Re: IPv6 dns

[Matt Crawford]

> The issue is not the vintage of the resolver -- it is a UDP datagram
> length problem. We assume a much larger v6 datagram can get through
> without the risk of fragmentation.

I can't believe the consideration that led to the nonsensical limit
of 512 was the risk of fragmentation in transit.  I'm sure it must
have been the receiver's ability to reassemble.  (The logic leading
to 512 is still flawed, but it's much closer.)