Re: [Int-area] New Version Notification for draft-herbert-ipv4-udpencap-eh-00.txt

[Fernando Gont <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Joe,

On 8/3/19 04:57, Joe Touch wrote:
> 
> On 3/7/2019 9:03 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
[....]
>> 2) Encapsulate extension headers and following transport packet in GUE/UDP
> 
> Which, as I noted, undermines the useful work performed by firewalls.
> 
> All so we can have routers process options - something they basically
> don't do anyway...(I don't know who's pushing otherwise in 6man, but
> this issue has been a big one for *many* years)

Not sure what you mean.

The argument has typically been as follows:

 * Folks need to get some upper-layer values (see:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops for
reasons)

 * EHs make that painful

 * As a result, many folks frop EHs. See RFC7872

 * In some circles this is well-understood and "no problem", in others
   it is probably "incomfortably understood" and prefer not to talk
   about it

   + the conversation would boil down to something like:
       - this feature is not usable on the public internet
       - many devices are not really IPv6-ready (standards wise)
       - with the previous two issues probably suggesting that the
         functionality should be removed.

   + fwiw, i don't care that much about the outcome, as long as there's
     some level of convergence among specs, devices, and deployed
     reality

Thanks!

Cheers,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: [e-mail]
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492