Re: happy eyesockets

[Michael van Elst <mlelstv%serpens.de@localhost>]

On Sun, Mar 23, 2025 at 08:13:34AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> mlelstv%serpens.de@localhost (Michael van Elst) writes:
> 
> > gdt%lexort.com@localhost (Greg Troxel) writes:
> >
> >>I don't object and I think you have a good point, but what do the
> >>standards say?
> >
> > RFC1122 describes how to handle ICMP messages and distinguishes
> > between soft errors (event gets registered, but protocol continues)
> > and hard errors (a TCP connection is aborted).
> 
> As I understand you, the proposed chagne is noncompilant, and thus
> presumptively shouldn't go in.  Is that how you see it?


Yes. At least the EHOSTUNREACH error should not abort and the test
needs to be refined further for IPv6.

I'm not sure if if then still helps for broken IPv6 networks.


Greetings,
-- 
                                Michael van Elst
Internet: mlelstv%serpens.de@localhost
                                "A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."