> Is this more agreeable?
I did not disagree with the first one, actually. :-)
It was cleaner, to be honest.
In any case, after reading mail by Jon Grimm, the things
became cleaner. BTW what is "chunk" size in current implementation?
Essentially, to make a compromise between usability and sanity,
it is enough to make the thing which we make with UDP: to prevent
sending bogus fragmented packets when IP_MTUDISC_DO is set by user
and set chunk size to a value < min(512,current mtu) in this case,
so no fragments will be generated. In that case I will be happy
(done all that possible, all the flaws are directed to SCTP designers. :-))
and default behaviour (it is IP_MTUDISC_WANT) still will be rfc compliant.
> If not, do you prefer SCTP having its own ip_xmit
Hey, only not this. :-)
BTW what did you make with IPv6? We even not have any analogue
to ip_fragment there at the moment. Do not worry, we have to do this
in any case, not depending on SCTP demands. :-)