In message <[email protected]>, "Bjoern A . Zeeb" writes: > On 3. Jan 2012, at 05:05 , Fernando Gont wrote: > > > On 01/02/2012 07:48 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: > >> You'd need to go to the origins most likely and get into touch with them, > >> ask them, work with them to identify things and see if you can find a > >> common denominator... > >> > >> It might really be worth doing so; in case we are hunting misconfiguration > s > >> or bugs here and discussing the merits on how to handle other than drop;-) > > > > Why should you drop in this case, when it's trivial to process these > > fragments safely, with no side effects?? > > Because a fragment header that's not needed a) heats the planet, b-z) does > all the things what that means. The more we can force that not to happen > the better we are off.
Atomic fragments > 1280 should not appear in the network. Atomic fragments <= 1280 are a expected part of the IPv6 landscape. For TCP they should be rare. For UDP it depends on the protocol running on top of UDP. PMTUD relying on PTB is just not reliable. > -- > Bjoern A. Zeeb You have to have visions! > It does not matter how good you are. It matters what good you do! > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > [email protected] > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [email protected] -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
