Re: What if? [was Re: Extension Header Insertion]

[Fernando Gont <[e-mail]>]

On 10/12/19 19:50, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Thanks Darren. I will hold off on the spring draft until we see a new version, since several of us are simply repeating ourselves at this point.
> 
> On balance I'm inclined to point a finger at RFC8200:
> 
>>    Each extension header should occur at most once, except for the
>>    Destination Options header, which should occur at most twice (once
>>    before a Routing header and once before the upper-layer header).
> 
> I now think that either that "should" should be a "must", or there
> should be an explicit statement that only one routing header is
> allowed. The complexities of multiple routing headers are endless.
> 
> What do others think?

+1

FWIW, this is irrespective of the current discussion we're having.

(There was a related I-D targetted at 6man, which for some reason
vanished, by at least one author from Cisco, IIRC)

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: [e-mail] || [e-mail]
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1