[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8761btxxjm.fsf@nemi.mork.no>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 18:27:09 +0100
From: Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: harouth@...eaurora.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next] net: ipv6: Add sysctl entry to disable MTU updates from RA
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> writes:
> Under what circumstances would userland ignore a router advertized
> MTU, and are the RFCs ok with this?
RFC 4861 ( https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4861#page-54 ) says:
"If the MTU option is present, hosts SHOULD copy the option's value
into LinkMTU so long as the value is greater than or equal to the
minimum link MTU [IPv6] and does not exceed the maximum LinkMTU value
specified in the link-type-specific document (e.g., [IPv6-ETHER])."
So the RFC acknowledge that there may exist valid reasons in particular
circumstances to ignore the MTU option. As others have stated: This
might be necessary for DoS prevention, working around bugs in other
equipment, etc.
Bjørn
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists