A response to an old message, but I'm doing so since this was covered
in today's meeting...
>>>>> On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 11:34:26 -0700,
>>>>> Fred Templin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> "As much of invoking packet as will fit without the
> ICMPv6 packet exceeding the minimum IPv6 MTU"
> (A variation of this phrase also appears in section 2.4 (c),
> accompanied by an even stronger "MUST include".)
> In each of these instances, I would like to see: "will fit"
> replaced by "possible", as in:
> "As much of invoking packet as possible without the
> ICMPv6 packet exceeding the minimum IPv6 MTU"
> Reason is that: "will fit" is redundant with: "without ... exceeding
> the minimum IPv6 MTU". Secondly, "will fit" when accompanied
> by "MUST include as much of the IPv6 offending (invoking) packet"
> in section 2.4 (c) seems to presume that all implementations will
> be able to efficiently access up to 1280 bytes of the offending packet
> when generating the error, and in some cases this may not be possible.
Just checking: which "cases" do you specifically mean that "this may
not be possible"?
JINMEI, Tatuya
Communication Platform Lab.
Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
