Subject: Re: RFC2460: question about next header field

From: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉<[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 11:57:04 +0900

>>>>> On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 13:11:29 +0900, 
>>>>> Yukiyo Akisada <[email-masked]> said:

> RFC2460 says, the node send Parameter Problem Code 1
> when the node doesn't support the next header type.

(snip)

> If the subsequent payload is empty, what should the node do?

>     IPv6 Header
>         Next Header = Destination Options Header
>     Destination Options Header
>         Next Header = unrecognized Next Header type
>     No Next Header
>         Payload     = 0 octets

> Should the node send Parameter Problem? or just discard it?

> The text says "a node is required to proceed to the next header",
> and 0 octets payload doesn't need to be proceeded by the node.

This is somewhat a pathological case, but I don't see any reason why
we cannot send the parameter problem error in this case.  Besides, I
don't necessarily think the fact that the 'next header' is empty
implies the processing node is NOT required to proceed to the (empty)
next header.  So, in my interpretation, the If clause in RFC2460
should still apply.

					JINMEI, Tatuya
					Communication Platform Lab.
					Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
					[email-masked]

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------