From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 26 17:34:42 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [69.147.83.53]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6AC4106564A for ; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 17:34:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6928014FA2C for ; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 17:34:42 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <50117FB2.1060306@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 10:34:42 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org References: <50117DB0.7010909@mh-sec.de> In-Reply-To: <50117DB0.7010909@mh-sec.de> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.2 OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <50117DB0.7010909@mh-sec.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Subject: Fwd: Re: [ipv6hackers] funny FreeBSD bug X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 17:34:42 -0000 FYI, this conversation is happening in the list below. I have no opinion regarding whether it is a bug or not, but I thought folks here might be interested. Doug -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [ipv6hackers] funny FreeBSD bug Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 19:26:08 +0200 From: Marc Heuse Reply-To: IPv6 Hackers Mailing List To: IPv6 Hackers Mailing List , Simon Perreault Hi Simon, Am 26.07.2012 17:47, schrieb Simon Perreault: > Le 2012-07-26 08:35, Marc Heuse a écrit : >> I found a funny bug in freebsd (9.0 with all updates): >> if you send an ICMP toobig message to it with a too low MTU size, >> FreeBSD will prepend any packet data with an one-shot fragment (or >> atomic fragment as Fernando calls it). > > Why do you think it's a bug? first it servs no use to add the fragmentation header if the packet is not fragmented. second I have not seen this behaviour in other OS, however I havent looked for it though. > Seems like normal IPv6 behaviour to me. It's in the RFC... I cant remember having seen this in any rfc - do you have a pointer? Greets, Marc -- Marc Heuse www.mh-sec.de PGP: FEDD 5B50 C087 F8DF 5CB9 876F 7FDD E533 BF4F 891A _______________________________________________ Ipv6hackers mailing list Ipv6hackers@lists.si6networks.com http://lists.si6networks.com/listinfo/ipv6hackers