> A example of deprecation that is close to what we are discussing
> regarding fragmentation can be found in:
>
> This document formally deprecates the IPv6 site-local unicast prefix
> defined in [RFC3513], i.e., 1111111011 binary or FEC0::/10. The
> special behavior of this prefix MUST no longer be supported in new
> implementations.
hmmm. i am gonna put my foot in the cow pie.
i think what we want here is something close to
o future implementations SHOULD not generate frags
(note that SHOULD != MUST)
o expect to receive frags for a long time
randy
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
