From nobody Tue Jun 29 02:24:37 2021
Return-Path: <nick@foobar.org>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2FEA3A2CA7
 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 02:24:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.236
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.236 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.338,
 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001,
 URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44])
 by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id tzXGA3EMdYW7 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>;
 Tue, 29 Jun 2021 02:24:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.netability.ie (mail.netability.ie
 [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 330C53A2CA4
 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 02:24:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Envelope-To: ipv6@ietf.org
Received: from crumpet.local (admin.ibn.ie [46.182.8.8]) (authenticated bits=0)
 by mail.netability.ie (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPSA id 15T9ON1B039032
 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
 Tue, 29 Jun 2021 10:24:23 +0100 (IST) (envelope-from nick@foobar.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: cheesecake.ibn.ie: Host admin.ibn.ie [46.182.8.8]
 claimed to be crumpet.local
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-herbert-6man-eh-limits-00.txt
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: 6man <ipv6@ietf.org>
References: <162441011024.16699.3109899403536421779@ietfa.amsl.com>
 <380f8ddb-2b12-c7b2-b141-f6eaba06968a@gmail.com>
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
Message-ID: <0669e464-f30c-6f79-db01-d6e6c371f8ad@foobar.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 10:24:22 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.16; rv:52.0)
 Gecko/20100101 PostboxApp/7.0.48
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <380f8ddb-2b12-c7b2-b141-f6eaba06968a@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/4hskDLvWNpkyskUiQ9gjZifDXas>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>,
 <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>,
 <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 09:24:36 -0000

Brian E Carpenter wrote on 29/06/2021 00:22:
> So, if we prescribed a 64 byte limit, we would also limit what extension headers can achieve.

quantification of requirements might be helpful here? i.e. if the draft 
included a table of RFCs (+ IDs?) with data about EH size, specifically 
the minimum size but possibly also a useful size range and maximum where 
that existed.

https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-parameters

Nick

