Vishwas Manral wrote: > Hi Suresh/ Vlad, > > For SIIT the fragment header is used to signal the ability to > fragment, it does not state it is a fragment itself.
First, this only happens when the IPv4 host does not support path mtu discovery (DF bit is 0). In this case, inserting a fragment header at the translator in essence performs the fragmentation that was requested by the sender. I just so happens that in this case the fragment might have offset and M flag set to 0. > >> A fragment with offset 0 and M flag 0 is just treated as the ONLY >> fragment. No harm don > But there are different policies for fragments, including some that > drop fragments. It is not the correct behavior, I feel the definition > of a fragment should be clarified. Now you are getting in policies outside of the definition. The definition does not have to encompass all eventual uses. Otherwise we'll be updating a lot more specs. -vlad -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
