Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8200 (5933)

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

On 12-Dec-19 18:45, Fernando Gont wrote:
> On 11/12/19 23:22, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> Yes, a note that updating Segments Left is legal would fix it I think.
> 
> It would seems to me that more is needed. For instance, for RHT0 you had
> to swap the address in the Destination Address with  with the next
> segment in the RHT0 payload.

Yes, decrementing Segments Left presumably applies to all routing headers,
but you are correct that other changes might be specified.

> 
> So I guess the text should look something like:
> 
>     A Routing Header is not inserted, or deleted by any node along a
>     packet's delivery path, until the packet reaches the final
>     destination node (or each of the set of final destination nodes, in
>     the case of multicast). A Routing Header is not processed by any
>     node along a packet's delivery path, until the packet reaches the
>     destination node (or each of the set of destination nodes, in the
>     case of multicast) identified by the Destination Address field of
>     the IPv6 header.
> 
> ?

OK

> 
> I wonder if it might be better to keep the insertion/deletion part in a
> single place, to avoid repetiton, and then just discuss processing, but
> not insertion/deletion.  -- Or whether repetition is needed for each of
> the "special" EHs, such that folk do not assume that the comments on
> insertion/deletion do not applyto the "special" EHs.

I would prefer spelling it out in detail to avoid doubt.

   Brian