Cc'd to INTAREA, where I believe fundamental changes to IP should be
discussed:
On 6/12/2013 5:21 AM, Fernando Gont wrote:
On 06/12/2013 02:37 AM, Mark Andrews wrote:
The obvious limit is no re-assembly required to find the L4 header.
That's already in draft-ietf-6man-oersized-header-chain
Why is that not being reviewed in INTAREA?
This isn't a 6man issue:
It is not chartered to develop major changes or
additions to the IPv6 specifications
Further, at best, 2460 should say that the first fragment should include
everything up to and including the fragment header. However, anything
other than that wouldn't reassemble, so it's a self-correcting
implementation error.
EVERYTHING that IP *needs* to examine is before the frag header; that's
already in 2460.
Joe
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
Int-area@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
