IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: some feedback on feedback on draft-bonica-6man-ext-hdr-update-03

Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar> Mon, 25 May 2020 07:12 UTC

Return-Path: <fernando@gont.com.ar>
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 553C23A0C93 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 May 2020 00:12:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 8N_AuzucJCKq for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 May 2020 00:12:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tools.si6networks.com (v6toolkit.go6lab.si [IPv6:2001:67c:27e4::57]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6FB33A0C8C for <6man@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 May 2020 00:12:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2800:810:464:8801:dd85:c59a:9374:35d6] (unknown [IPv6:2800:810:464:8801:dd85:c59a:9374:35d6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by tools.si6networks.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6CB1D3FFBF; Mon, 25 May 2020 09:11:54 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: Re: some feedback on feedback on draft-bonica-6man-ext-hdr-update-03
To: "Xiejingrong (Jingrong)" <xiejingrong@huawei.com>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, 6MAN <6man@ietf.org>
References: <CAJE_bqcR8gg6c4c=4sU8zfs5B0gaT4AFtKrbq9o2CFw_Yo4qvA@mail.gmail.com> <fd375263-2b3a-f20d-cf51-d5f39a62c5bf@gmail.com> <69f92d989fca4a7bb3117d6afa84eade@huawei.com>
From: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
Message-ID: <c14bb0d4-e1a8-2d67-3c36-8657f94ca553@gont.com.ar>
Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 03:12:56 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <69f92d989fca4a7bb3117d6afa84eade@huawei.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/N-iPmsEjLucMvxon6IwC5ual5Dw>
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: Mon, 25 May 2020 07:12:03 -0000

On 25/5/20 01:56, Xiejingrong (Jingrong) wrote:
> Hi Brian,
> 
> Maybe the more you assume "Destination node" as "final/ultimate destination node", the more you will be confusing.
> To me, "Destination node" is very simple to mean "the node (or each of the set of nodes, in the case of multicast) identified in the Destination Address field".

Ironically, it would be quite interesting to have a multicast address as 
a "Destination Node", unless "Destination Node" implies final destination.

(note: rfc2460 banned both cases for RHT0)

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email