* Karl Auer: > I'm puzzled by something in RFC1981, which discusses PMTUD and IPv6. > > It contains these two paragraphs towards the end of Section 4: > > A node MUST NOT reduce its estimate of the Path MTU below the IPv6 > minimum link MTU. > > Note: A node may receive a Packet Too Big message reporting a > next-hop MTU that is less than the IPv6 minimum link MTU. In that > case, the node is not required to reduce the size of subsequent > packets sent on the path to less than the IPv6 minimun link MTU, > but rather must include a Fragment header in those packets [IPv6- > SPEC].
I've recently submitted an erratum to section 5 of RFC 2460, which contains a similar requirement. The requirement makes it impossible to serve IPv6 services in a stateless fashion, so it's clearly bogus. (Technically, you could always include the Fragment header, but that would be an ugly kludge.) -- Florian Weimer <fwei...@bfk.de> BFK edv-consulting GmbH http://www.bfk.de/ Kriegsstraße 100 tel: +49-721-96201-1 D-76133 Karlsruhe fax: +49-721-96201-99 -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
