Hi,
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Vishwas Manral wrote:
I think that is the minimum Link MTU and not the smallest size non-last
fragment.
Can you point me to the RFC/ draft which says what you stated?
This is a good point. Let me copy a part of Elwyn Davies's message on
the list on September:
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 23:14:26 +0100
From: Elwyn Davies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Bob Hinden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brian Haberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: Taking RFC2460 (base IPv6) spec to full standard - issues
outstanding
....
[outstanding issues in core IPv6 spec before moving to full standard]
? Fragment reassembly algorithm - should explicitly forbid overlapped
fragments and possibly require that non-final fragments are (say) at
least 1024 bytes.
The minimum IPv6 fragment size is not specified AFAICT.
--
Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
