>>>>> On Sat, 18 Nov 2000 18:21:15 +0100,
>>>>> Francis Dupont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I have one more question about the option. What if the size of an
> outgoing packet is larger than the MTU of the outgoing interface on
> the sending node, when the application set the IPV6_RECVPATHMTU
> option? Should the kerenl pass the IPV6_PATHMTU ancillary data with
> the MTU of the outgoing interface?
> => I can't see the issue. The kernel doesn't return ancillary data
> on sending system calls. It will fragment the packet or return an
> EMSGSIZE if fragmentation is disable, and will return the path MTU
> (less or equal to the MTU of the outgoing interface) in an ancillary
> data on a receiving system call or a getsockopt().
> (BTW, our current implementation does not pass the ancillary data on
> the sending node. In such a case, it just fragment the packet using
> the MTU of the outgoing interface.)
> => IPV6_RECVPATHMTU is not supposed to do something on the sending side,
> is it?
I think you and I said the same thing, but there may be some
misunderstanding due to my poor explanation (sorry). My intention was,
What if the size of an outgoing packet is larger than the MTU of
the outgoing interface on the sending node, when the application
set the IPV6_RECVPATHMTU option? Should the application receive an
IPV6_PATHMTU ancillary data item in a succeeding recvmsg call?
and your answer is "yes". Am I clear enough now?
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
