On 19 Jun 2024, at 22:56, Tim Wicinski <tjw.i...@gmail.com> wrote: On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 2:49 PM Paul Vixie <paul=40redbarn....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
I wonder if you and Paul could say more about this. While it's slightly odd to see a draft with v6ops in the name giving advice about the DNS, this document doesn't (as written) prohibit or demand anything; all it seems to do is recommend without normative capitals that if you're going to use UDP transport with v6 you limit the message size such that the resulting v6 datagram doesn't exceed 1280 octets. This is established, current practice, as far as I know, from root servers on downwards. Fragmentation in v6 is problematic by design, especially for stateless, transactional protocols, film at 11. Is the objection that this doesn't need to be said, or that it would be better if someone else said it, or something else? I can see lots of nits I would prefer to be corrected in the document but I confess I don't understand the vehemence of the objection. What am I missing? Joe |
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- dnsop@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to dnsop-le...@ietf.org
