>>>>> On 16 Nov 2000 17:23:14 +0100, 
>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Niels M�ller) said:

>> By the way, the rfc2292bis draft seems a bit ambiguous on the byte
>> order of the 32-bit MTU value. Like other fields used in the spec, I
>> treated the value in the network byte order, but the spec should
>> clearly specify the byte order.

> Is this value ever transmitted on the wire?

No, but the MTU value would be copied from the corresponding ICMPv6
error message, so I don't surprise if an implementation keeps the
field in the network byte order.

However, I don't stick to using the network byte order. The point is
that we should clearly state the byte order in the spec.

                                        JINMEI, Tatuya
                                        Communication Platform Lab.
                                        Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
                                        [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to