The MAP-T draft actually covers that, with the following text. MAP-E should do the equivalent with ICMPv4. Think the text on this accidentally fell through the cracks during the editorial cleanup.
The CE SHOULD check that MAP-T received packets' destination transport-layer destination port number is in the range allowed for by the CE's MAP BMR configuration. The CE SHOULD drop any non conforming packet and respond with an ICMPv6 "Address Unreachable" (Type 1, Code 3). On 9 July 2013 17:06, Tom Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > Section 8.1 of draft-ietf-softwire-map talks about rules for processing > incoming packets. The first paragraph says that the CE checks the received > port number against the stateful port mapping table, but doesn't say what > it does if the port is out of range. > > I'm interested in whether the BR receives a notification when this happens > (i.e., an ICMPv6 error message like the one described in the next paragraph > going the other way). This would allow the BR to log the error. > > Is the failure to specify CE action deliberate or should it be specified? > > Tom Taylor > ______________________________**_________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/softwires<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires> >
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
