Re: FW: New Version Notification for draft-tsou-6man-hbh-header-update-00.txt
sreenatha <sreenatha.b@huawei.com> Fri, 09 March 2012 04:56 UTC
Return-Path: <sreenatha.b@huawei.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 0F44B21F855D for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 20:56:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.59
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.59 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.792, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_52=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_63=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_92=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 974kWy3Zh12M for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 20:56:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.64]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 571FA21F855A for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 20:56:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from huawei.com (szxga05-in [172.24.2.49]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0M0L0022TPLMIE@szxga05-in.huawei.com> for ipv6@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 12:53:46 +0800 (CST)
Received: from szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0M0L00DA6PLMU4@szxga05-in.huawei.com> for ipv6@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 12:53:46 +0800 (CST)
Received: from szxeml214-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.1.9-GA) with ESMTP id AHS10126; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 12:53:39 +0800
Received: from SZXEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.35) by szxeml214-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.29) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 12:52:56 +0800
Received: from blrprnc08ns (10.18.96.97) by szxeml403-hub.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.323.3; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 12:53:37 +0800
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 10:23:36 +0530
From: sreenatha <sreenatha.b@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for draft-tsou-6man-hbh-header-update-00.txt
X-Originating-IP: [10.18.96.97]
To: rja.lists@gmail.com
Message-id: <003001ccfdb0$96c8b870$c45a2950$@com>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_RQqeSzXKOXZ0NHOdM/hXWQ)"
Content-language: en-us
Thread-index: Acz9sJX7WxZMBmY/Thmb6WEWroFKyg==
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 23:50:41 -0800
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: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 04:56:17 -0000
Hi Ran, I went through the RFC's which Brian mentioned. For Quick Start option, while inserting the option only they can do whatever processing need to be done.(Decrementing TTL value in the option. If Application is inserting the Quick Start option means, node is supporting for Quick Start, so it can decrement the TTL and insert the option.) In most of the ipv6 stack implementation currently exist(It includes FreeBSD), ip6_output_function implementation is like this: Ip6_output_function() { ---- ---- ---- ---- If (HopByHop header need to be insert(any options in under HopByHop need to insert)) Insert the options. ---- ---- ---- /*Since RFC 2460 mandates even source should process the HopByHop header, do the processing.*/ If (HopByHop header is present) Process the options. ---- ---- ---- ---- } So here what is the advantage we will get by inserting the header and immediately processing the header? If we inserting the header correctly, always Processing of the header will be valid. This only I suggested no need to process in source. And in case of node which is acting as both Host and Router: Node behaves differently for Packets which are originated from itself and for packets which are need to be forwarded. For packets originated by itself, Ip6_output_function will be called to send out the packets. HopByHop header insertion and processing is explained above. For packets need to be forwarded: Ip6_input_function followed by Ip6_forward_function is called. HopByHop header processing will be done in Ip6_input_function during forwarding. So no question of skipping HopByHop header processing by Node which is acting both as Host/Router. In draft we just saying that source node which is inserting the HopByHop header no need to process it again. It might be any options under HopByHop header, while inserting only it will insert correctly(If implementation follows correct specification of that Options!) So again processing the header is unnecessary what I am feeling. (As in ip6_output_function) Thanks- B.Sreenatha Setty, Message: 5 Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 14:42:57 -0500 From: RJ Atkinson <rja.lists@gmail.com> To: ipv6@ietf.org Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for draft-tsou-6man-hbh-header-update-00.txt Message-ID: <F3B52779-6332-46D2-AC50-D27061F9ADC9@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I agree with Joel H's note here: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/current/msg15503.html> I also agree with Brian C's note here: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/current/msg15514.html> I think it important that we do not make changes that effectively close the door on Quick-Start. Also, mindful of Brian's scenario, where a single device is acting both as host and as relay/router, it is very likely that a CALIPSO-enabled host function would emit a packet that the CALIPSO-enabled router function would be required to at least parse, lex, and compare with the allowed CALIPSO label ranges on the candidate output interface. While CALIPSO is only deployed in selected networks, I understand that those networks often are built out of off-the-shelf equipment and software. Yours, Ran
- FW: New Version Notification for draft-tsou-6man-… Tina TSOU
- Re: FW: New Version Notification for draft-tsou-6… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-tsou-6man-… sreenatha
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-tsou-6man-… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: FW: New Version Notification for draft-tsou-6… RJ Atkinson
- Re: FW: New Version Notification for draft-tsou-6… sreenatha
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-tsou-6man-… RJ Atkinson