Re: [BEHAVE] UDP zero checksums and v4 to v6 translators

[Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont at fdupont.fr>]

 In your previous mail you wrote:

   > BEHAVE's issue is to decide whether dropping them is
   > an acceptable recommendation for v4->v6 translators.
   
   So there are really several cases
   
=> you do two can-be-wrong assumptions here:
 - NATs don't verify checksums: they use so called incremental updates
  which are far easier (constant and small time)
 - in the case of v6/v4 translations often only addresses are translated
  and in some cases in a stateless way. So there is no need to reassemble
  packets.
As you work for Microsoft, can you explain current and future windows
behavior about UDP checksums (I believe the default is non-zero
offloaded into the hardware but I'd like to know more...)?

Thanks

Francis.Dupont at fdupont.fr

BTW I asked LISP author to downgrade the MUST into something more
reasonable (even it doesn't matter in v4/v6 translation).