> On 11 Nov 2018, at 4:13 am, Jason McIntyre <j...@kerhand.co.uk> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 10:50:14AM -0700, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 12:54:49PM +0100, Klemens Nanni wrote:
>>> Yes, although I agree with jmc on simpler wording. FWIW, FreeBSD just
>>> goes with "-D Set the Don't Fragment bit" as well.
>>
>> There is no "Don't Fragment bit" in IPv6, so this is wrong.
It could be argued that since
>>
>> In IPv4 we do set the don't fragment bit in the packet to prevent
>> router fragmentation, in IPv6 we prevent fragmentation in the local
>> output path.
>>
>> The "Don;t fragment transmitted packets." is not precise. In IPv6
>> it would be the other way around "Don;t transmit fragmented packets."
>>
>> What about "-D Prevent IP fragments."?
>>
>> bluhm
>>
>
> that sounds fine too. should we talk about packets though? "Don't
> fragment IP packets." or "Prevent fragmentation of IP packets." or
> somesuch?
I think it's important to have "Don't Fragment" in there in some form.
I'll commit it with "Don't fragment IP packets".
dlg
