Re: I-D Action: draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion-07.txt

[Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Le 15/10/2019 à 00:12, Fernando Gont a écrit :
> On 12/10/19 16:57, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I'd like to comment on this version. It is in fact a complete
>> rewrite compared to its predecessors and I thank the authors for
>> that. The tone is now purely technical, and that's a great
>> improvement.
> 
> It is somewhat frustrating that the draft still fails to argue why
> EH insertion instead of encapsulation.

As usual, I think one of the reasons is a difficulty in qualifying what
it means 'encapsulation'.

There is IP-in-IP encapsulation.

But there is also encapsulation like in transporting, or carrying, by
means of other intermediary headers, layer2, MPLS, security headers and
future internet shims and GRE and routing headers.

IP-in-IP encapsulation is clearly an alternative to EH insertion.

But all the other encapsulations are so messy that one may legitimately
think that a new EH insert/delete standardized according to good WG
principles would be proper, universal, and solve all  problems of GRE
for example.

Alex

> 
>