> This makes me think about something strange in Path MTU Discovery.
>
> A note in the section 4 of Path MTU Discovery for IPv6 (RFC1981) say:
> "A node may receive a Packet Too Big message reporting a
> next-hop MTU that is less than the IPv6 minimum link MTU. In that
> case, the node is not required to reduce the size of subsequent
> packets sent on the path to less than the IPv6 minimun link MTU,
> but rather must include a Fragment header in those packets [IPv6-
> SPEC]."
>
> Does this can cause problems with the IPv6 standard that specify that
> under 1280 octets, the layer below IPv6 must deal with the
> fragmentation ?
That language, and similar language in RFC 2460 is present to
handle IPv4<->IPv6 packet translators such as those defined in RFC 2765 and
RFC 2766.
Hopefully an update to RFC 1981 (when moving to draft standard) can add
a reference to those RFCs to help explain the intended use.
Erik
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
