On the topic of what this extension means for future
ICMP messages:
Its obvious that whoever designs new ICMP messages
should consider this work and decide whether it
applies to those new messages or not. We should
add words to this effect to the document. I would
rather not use keywords or a strict must requirement,
however, because whether this or some other way to
extend a new message is appropriate probably depends
on the nature and format of that message.
By the way, Section 3 contains still some text
that talks about "any ICMP messages".
Here's some suggested text:
To replace the item list from Section 3:
- An ICMP Extension Structure MAY be appended to ICMP
messages Destination Unreachable, Source Quench,
Time Exceeded, and Parameter Problem.
- These messages include an "original datagram" field, and
the message formats are updated to specify a length
attribute for the "original datagram" field.
The "original datagram" field MUST include at least 128
octets. If the original datagram did not contain 128 octets,
the "original datagram" field MUST be zero padded to 128
octets.
The "original datagram" field MUST be zero padded to
the nearest 32-bit boundary.
To replace the current statement from Section 4.5:
ICMP messages defined in the future should indicate
whether or not they support the extension mechanism defined
in this specification. It is recommended that all new messages
employ some mechanism that allows later extensions.
--Jari
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
