Kuari wrote:
On Jun 3, 2012, at 12:34 AM, C. M. Heard wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jun 2012, Masataka Ohta wrote:
Existing routers, which was relying on ID uniqueness of atomic
packets, are now broken when they fragment the atomic packets.
>>
Such routers were always broken. An atomic packet has DF=0 and any
router fragmenting such a packet was and is non-compliant with
the relevant specifications (RFCs 791, 1122, 1812).
>
Sorry, but no….
Not following the RFC != broken. Not following the RFC == non-compliant.
There are numerous places where implementations do not follow the
specs for various reasons, ranging from simply not bothering, through
philosophical differences to customers paying for non-compliant feature X.
Vendors that "choose to ignore" (IMO, that's "violates") the specs
rarely make clear their rationale or the consequences to users.
Regardless, as has been noted, the routers were already non-compliant
when they ignored the flags of an atomic datagram.
Joe
