Hi Brian, 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 12:27 PM
> To: Templin, Fred L
> Cc: Havard Eidnes; [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Fragmentation-related security issues
> 
> On 2012-01-07 06:07, Templin, Fred L wrote:
> >  
> > 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Havard Eidnes [mailto:[email protected]] 
> >> Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 12:28 AM
> >> To: Templin, Fred L
> >> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]
> >> Subject: Re: Fragmentation-related security issues
> >>
> >>>> The problem with RFC4821 (assumming the ICMP-free variant) is
> >>>> that it has a longer convergnece time that ICMP-enabled PMTU.
> >>> RFC4821 works even if there are no ICMPs, but will
> >>> converge more quickly if there are ICMPs. That is why
> >>> RFC4821 should be a SHOULD for hosts, and generation
> >>> of ICMPs should be a MUST for routers.
> >> Does not this also imply that ICMP-generating routers MUST use a
> >> globally unique IPv6 address as the source of the ICMP?
> > 
> > AFAICT, the normative reference is RFC4443, as cited
> > in RFC6434.
> 
> As I think we noticed recently in some other thread, there is
> therefore an operational requirement that all routers must
> possess at least one GUA. As far as I know, some routers can work
> just fine for all other purposes with only link-local addresses.

So - can't the router just autoconfigure a ULA and use
it as the SA for ICMPs?

Thanks - Fred

>   Brian
> 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to