Subject: Comments on draft-ietf-dnsext-message-size-00.txt

From: "Matt Crawford" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 08:51:10 -0500

First comment: Don't think in terms of DNS "MTU", rather think
in terms of DNS "buffer size" while keeping MTU considerations
in mind.

Second comment: I suggest 2048 as the minimum buffer size which
must be advertised by an OPT RR in the cases mentioned in the 
draft (and the case mentioned by Kazu Yamamoto).  This can lead
to fragmentation, which in IPv6 must be perfomred by the node
originating the packet.
				Matt

to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 01:00:31 +0900

>to fragmentation, which in IPv6 must be perfomred by the node

	minimum buffer size of 2048 is too big.  it exceeds minimum
	reassembly packet size requirement (must support packet size <= 1500
	octet after reassembly) for IPv6 nodes.

itojun