Subject: Re: Oppose: LL29 Link-local sources should specify TTL=1

From: Stuart Cheshire <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 19:03:44 -0800

>Setting TTL to 255 and checking the TTL on receipt amounts 
>to redefining the TTL field to be a "on this link" field for IP packets 
>that have IPv4LL source and/or destination addresses.  This redefinition 
>makes use of the behavior of existing routers but is not conveying the 
>information intended in the original definition of the TTL 
>field.

Unfortunately, other documents like LLMNR also propose requiring TTL=255.

If we specify that the TTL is 1 unless specified otherwise by the 
application (as several people have proposed), I fear we invite more 
chaos, not less.

Stuart Cheshire <[email-masked]>
 * Wizard Without Portfolio, Apple Computer, Inc.
 * www.stuartcheshire.org

---

From: Ralph Droms <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 22:08:50 -0500

OK, I have the same objection to abusing the TTL field in LLMNR, too.

:-)

- Ralph