Hi Jari, As this point was raised several times on the list, I think your text should cover the concerns covered. I agree that 2460 essentially requires a SHOULD in the node-requirements.
thanks, John > -----Original Message----- > From: ext Jari Arkko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 30 December, 2003 22:51 > To: Thomas Narten > Cc: Loughney John (NRC/Helsinki); [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Path MTU in node-requirements [was Re: FW: Evaluation of: > draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-07.txt ] > > > Thomas, > > > Seems to me, given the above wording, 2460 says Path MTU is > a SHOULD, > > not a MAY. Note that the MAY is about _not_ implementing it (in some > > situations), not a "MAY" implement it in some subset of the comment > > cases. > > > > I.e, if node-requirements says MAY, I think that is a downgrade from > > the SHOULD in 2460 as quoted above. I don't think this > document should > > be doing that. > > I agree that the node requirements document should follow what 2460 > says. > > Taking a new look at a the text, it does indeed sound more like a > "SHOULD normally implement but MAY not implement in some cases". > > RECOMMENDED is a synonym for SHOULD, and upper/lower case usually (?) > should not matter when interpreting protocol requirements. > > Suggested node requirements text change: > > 4.3.1 Path MTU Discovery - RFC1981 > > Path MTU Discovery [RFC-1981] MAY be supported. It is > expected that > most implementations will indeed support this, although > the possible > exception cases are sufficient that the used of "SHOULD" is not > justified. The rules in RFC 2460 MUST be followed for packet > fragmentation and reassembly. > > => > > 4.3.1 Path MTU Discovery - RFC1981 > > Path MTU Discovery [RFC-1981] SHOULD be supported, though minimal > implementations MAY choose to not support it and avoid > large packets. > The rules in RFC 2460 MUST be followed for packet > fragmentation and > reassembly. > > --Jari > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
