>>>>> "TM" == TM <Bless> writes:
>> RFC4291 is clear that packets destined to ff01::/16 must never
>> leave the local node, but what should be done if such packets are
>> received as a result from a broken implementation on the other
>> side?
TM> "Be liberal in what you accept, and conservative in what you
TM> send", Since the sending node obviously violated the 2nd part of
TM> Jon Postel's robustness principle, it should be ignored and
TM> dropped by the receiving system. Moreover, report the failure
The key is that the packets should be dropped without generating any
errors or traffic.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
pgpVu8XcqVFIo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
