Re: [IETF] Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-intarea-ipv4-id-update-05.txt (Updated Specification of the IPv4 ID Field) to Proposed Standard
Kuari wrote: On Jun 3, 2012, at 12:34 AM, C. M. Heard wrote: On Sat, 2 Jun 2012, Masataka Ohta wrote: Existing routers, which was relying on ID uniqueness of atomic packets, are now broken when they fragment the atomic packets. Such routers were always broken. An atomic packet has DF=0 and any router fragmenting such a packet was and is non-compliant with the relevant specifications (RFCs 791, 1122, 1812). Sorry, but no…. Not following the RFC != broken. Not following the RFC == non-compliant. There are numerous places where implementations do not follow the specs for various reasons, ranging from simply not bothering, through philosophical differences to customers paying for non-compliant feature X. Vendors that choose to ignore (IMO, that's violates) the specs rarely make clear their rationale or the consequences to users. Regardless, as has been noted, the routers were already non-compliant when they ignored the flags of an atomic datagram. Joe
Re: [IETF] Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-intarea-ipv4-id-update-05.txt (Updated Specification of the IPv4 ID Field) to Proposed Standard
-- No man is an island, But if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie them together, they make a pretty good raft. --Anon. On Jun 3, 2012, at 12:34 AM, C. M. Heard wrote: On Sat, 2 Jun 2012, Masataka Ohta wrote: Existing routers, which was relying on ID uniqueness of atomic packets, are now broken when they fragment the atomic packets. Such routers were always broken. An atomic packet has DF=0 and any router fragmenting such a packet was and is non-compliant with the relevant specifications (RFCs 791, 1122, 1812). Sorry, but no…. Not following the RFC != broken. Not following the RFC == non-compliant. There are numerous places where implementations do not follow the specs for various reasons, ranging from simply not bothering, through philosophical differences to customers paying for non-compliant feature X. Sorry, I'm in a somewhat pedantic mood, and I saw a soapbox, so I climbed up on it… W //cmh