IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Joel Jaeggli's Discuss on draft-ietf-6man-ext-transmit-04: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 08 October 2013 23:10 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
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 DBEA121F9A2D for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 16:10:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.274
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.274 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.325, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0hXpM7o2L9zG for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 16:10:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pd0-x22d.google.com (mail-pd0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C583821F9CA1 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 16:10:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pd0-f173.google.com with SMTP id p10so9104pdj.4 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 16:10:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=G5FkkLb/xyDm23U1KcnyCkPg+OBDtpolC3aHbGjdLNo=; b=ZcNI7JuYXxcuuv0HCBjcP78RlwBLMiLJzgJSQdWNk8bNSJPjwsGYyjL8QnqqdkJeq6 K1DnjKM1XFjOtIhWhd0NzsLG8bZ6BmuVebUSS7xvY9o+OxYDtUqp6miwkWmyRIv+DXtS 9/tTA7RhgJRngEyQeNrGAS6wxkpR2OK9XcmDz1ylVew2MBs4ll9iDM7kpI+w3mVsJfKv AEHe8PHdfHrr9hd6htPmraVJPiZyakiiurO69/16IpPQuRA1eHUGDExs5iuod0mtij8r qSi8GFMKD7cMzhzrZguJfdSbA2uyxW/oBPBYjdrH1WxeGxrGfhzQzXoxZqFx0wYMmSl/ 9NPA==
X-Received: by 10.68.135.100 with SMTP id pr4mr4687335pbb.62.1381273810392; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 16:10:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [130.216.38.234] (dhcp-38-19.cs.auckland.ac.nz. [130.216.38.234]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id oj6sm50159230pab.9.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 08 Oct 2013 16:10:09 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <525490D3.9000505@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 12:10:11 +1300
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Roland Bless <roland.bless@kit.edu>
Subject: Re: Joel Jaeggli's Discuss on draft-ietf-6man-ext-transmit-04: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
References: <20131008071948.25649.48005.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <525457C1.5030503@gmail.com> <E93EBFCB-54C3-44D3-8126-8439AD15046E@bogus.com> <525460CF.108@gmail.com> <52547462.5010309@kit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <52547462.5010309@kit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 08 Oct 2013 23:10:17 -0000

On 09/10/2013 10:08, Roland Bless wrote:
> Hi Brian,
> 
> On 08.10.2013 21:45, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> NEW
>>    Today, IPv6 packets are often forwarded not only on the basis of their
>>    first 40 bytes by straightforward IP routing. Some routers, and a
>>    variety of intermediate nodes often referred to as middleboxes, such
>>    as firewalls, load balancers, or packet classifiers, inspect other
>>    parts of each packet.
> 
> Yes, but not necessarily?
> I guess a NAT66 device is quite happy with processing the first 40 bytes
> only. 

I don't care about NAT66 but if you mean NPTv6, I suppose it's true.
Inserting "may" or perhaps "might" is OK by me.

    Brian

> Not clear what's the exact purpose of these sentences
> (definition of what a middlebox is or the fact that other parts
> are also of interest for middleboxes),
> but probably it's better to insert a "may also" before "inspect other".
> 
> Regards,
>  Roland
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email