[149796] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Common operational misconceptions
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Charles Mills)
Wed Feb 15 22:27:07 2012
In-Reply-To: <4F3C76D5.9040603@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 22:26:11 -0500
From: Charles Mills <w3yni1@gmail.com>
To: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Not understanding RFC1918. Actually got read the riot act by someone
because I worked for an organization that used 10.0.0.0/8 and that was
"their" network and "they" owned it.
Chuck
2012/2/15 Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
> Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> > This doesn't prove that IPv6 is not operational. All it proves is
> > people can misconfigure things.
>
> How do operators configure their equipments to treat
> ICMP packet too big generated against multicast and
> unicast?
>
> Note that, even if they do not enable inter-subnet
> multicast in their domains, the ICMP packets may
> still transit over or implode within their domains.
>
> Note also that some network processors can't efficiently
> distinguish ICMP packets generated against multicast and
> unicast.
>
> Masataka Ohta
>
>
