A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for Extension Headers
Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Fri, 31 January 2014 01:07 UTC
Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB0871A0504 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 17:07:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 rIIUu8s-wQPR for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 17:07:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from web01.jbserver.net (web01.jbserver.net [IPv6:2a00:d10:2000:e::3]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E33FA1A04EE for <6man@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 17:07:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 75-138-17-190.fibertel.com.ar ([190.17.138.75] helo=[192.168.3.102]) by web01.jbserver.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <fgont@si6networks.com>) id 1W92Zx-0002uU-J9; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 02:07:33 +0100
Message-ID: <52EAF63A.7050108@si6networks.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 22:02:50 -0300
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>, "Will Liu (Shucheng)" <liushucheng@huawei.com>, "C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>
Subject: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for Extension Headers
References: <20140130230740.25350.9524.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140130230740.25350.9524.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2
X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <20140130230740.25350.9524.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 31 Jan 2014 01:07:43 -0000
Folks, Mike Heard noted that the Uniform Format specified in RFC 6465 can't possibly work.. and after giving some thought about it, it turns out that implementing it would hamper the deployment of new transport protocols. We've written a short I-D that discussed the problem, and that proposes an alternative, such that we achieve the same goal without possibly messing with our Transport friends. :-) The I-D is available at: <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-6man-ipv6-universal-extension-header-00.txt> Thanks! Best regards, Fernando -------- Original Message -------- Subject: New Version Notification for draft-gont-6man-ipv6-universal-extension-header-00.txt Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 15:07:40 -0800 From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, "Fernando Gont" <fgont@si6networks.com>, "Shucheng LIU (Will)" <liushucheng@huawei.com>, Will (Shucheng) Liu <liushucheng@huawei.com> A new version of I-D, draft-gont-6man-ipv6-universal-extension-header-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Fernando Gont and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-gont-6man-ipv6-universal-extension-header Revision: 00 Title: IPv6 Universal Extension Header Document date: 2014-01-31 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 6 URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-6man-ipv6-universal-extension-header-00.txt Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gont-6man-ipv6-universal-extension-header/ Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-6man-ipv6-universal-extension-header-00 Abstract: This document analyzes a problem in the Uniform Format for IPv6 Extension Headers specified in RFC 6564, which results in forwarding nodes and middle-boxes not being able to process an IPv6 Header Chain if it contains an unrecognized IPv6 Extension Header that follows the aforementioned Uniform Format. Additionally, it specifies a new IPv6 Extension Header - the Universal Extension Header - that overcomes the aforementioned problem, and enables the extensibility of IPv6 without impairing middleboxes that need to process the entire IPv6 Header Chain. Finally, this document formally updates RFC 6564 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. The IETF Secretariat
- A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for Exte… Fernando Gont
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Hagen Paul Pfeifer
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Hagen Paul Pfeifer
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Jen Linkova
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Fernando Gont
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Suresh Krishnan
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Fernando Gont
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Thomas Narten
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Fernando Gont
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … brianjusa
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Randy Bush
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Fernando Gont
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Randy Bush
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Fernando Gont
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Karsten Thomann
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Hagen Paul Pfeifer
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Mark ZZZ Smith
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … C. M. Heard
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Fernando Gont
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … RJ Atkinson
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Fernando Gont
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Fernando Gont
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … RJ Atkinson
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Fernando Gont
- Re: Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format … Ray Hunter
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … C. M. Heard
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Mark ZZZ Smith
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Fernando Gont
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Dan Lüdtke
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Mark ZZZ Smith
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: A problem with RFC 6465's Uniform Format for … Fernando Gont