IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Question: Hop-by-Hop Header and Router Alert

"Christopher Morrow" <christopher.morrow@gmail.com> Mon, 26 May 2008 23:09 UTC

Return-Path: <ipv6-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ipv6-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ipv6-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 067903A6BF3; Mon, 26 May 2008 16:09:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB6BE3A6BF3 for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 May 2008 16:09:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rFn+yq9XsVmZ for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 May 2008 16:09:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rv-out-0506.google.com [209.85.198.231]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 820503A6BDC for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 May 2008 16:09:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id b25so2152283rvf.49 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 May 2008 16:09:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=moGFSYf3AorfHHPrrJFbp/yOfhZC8EbKeeR0sWIfLvw=; b=smKW2drgZA5Mz7Qu07jPz3QcIdJhCYqMSnu+s1QrFjL8Dny43xCb6aTS3VGdDgx+4qrZBNWRy32/ccMdlYv+xgKYRuFioWdBQYOlqP0Jv1qk9W28rzrQUT3b2/ddA8HQPLxWrpB3HTxo+QhE9o15QSzvIusNM3/VJ86Whe08xjk=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=jPYgZXR7QgZf1LNRg+ptKJMDlVDj3k9EeZrgG/wy/uNxxDs7gADgJ1s6JHxBAGwTMljcmHMHLMXZGqG677hHyZxhZA0Mahh6nqYRWZCdTQMMAAT0LubFHQnRU7FbcDO/K1m0FwA0kG9Te1bIwUUmdXjItMrC0g9+oroUucj7AY8=
Received: by 10.114.180.1 with SMTP id c1mr576530waf.204.1211843387755; Mon, 26 May 2008 16:09:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.114.203.8 with HTTP; Mon, 26 May 2008 16:09:47 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <75cb24520805261609i61b2165cuf9470b1602399751@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 19:09:47 -0400
From: Christopher Morrow <christopher.morrow@gmail.com>
To: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
Subject: Re: Question: Hop-by-Hop Header and Router Alert
In-Reply-To: <483B27A1.7040705@ericsson.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <20080526133239.311900@gmx.net> <483B27A1.7040705@ericsson.com>
Cc: SpawnRR@gmx.de, ipv6@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org

On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 5:12 PM, Suresh Krishnan
<suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com> wrote:
> Hi Bernd,
>
> SpawnRR@gmx.de wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm contacting you as I've a question regarding the Hop-by-Hop header
>> option 'Router Alert' and its exact use. I hope I don't disturb you...
>
> I am generally against any new proposal that uses hop by hop options
> (including router alerts) since they could increase the processing loads
> on intermediate routers and could be used as a DoS vector,
>

most larger ip backbones today don't pay attention (drop/ignore)
Router-Alert ip-options in ipv4, I don't expect that trend to change
in ipv6... If you are planning on using hop-by-hop or router-alert in
ipv6 you probably are planning on a failed solution.

-chris
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email