IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

SpawnRR@gmx.de Tue, 27 May 2008 07:56 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 428163A6A45; Tue, 27 May 2008 00:56:01 -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 B30043A67E6 for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 May 2008 00:55:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.484
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.484 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.115, 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 KbWW-M0aJNX6 for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 May 2008 00:55:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 7CF0E3A67DD for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 May 2008 00:55:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 18519 invoked by uid 0); 27 May 2008 07:56:00 -0000
Received: from 195.37.70.39 by www078.gmx.net with HTTP; Tue, 27 May 2008 09:56:00 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 09:56:00 +0200
From: SpawnRR@gmx.de
In-Reply-To: <75cb24520805261609i61b2165cuf9470b1602399751@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20080527075600.294980@gmx.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20080526133239.311900@gmx.net> <483B27A1.7040705@ericsson.com> <75cb24520805261609i61b2165cuf9470b1602399751@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Question: Hop-by-Hop Header and Router Alert
To: suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com
X-Authenticated: #8754011
X-Flags: 0001
X-Mailer: WWW-Mail 6100 (Global Message Exchange)
X-Priority: 3
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+DfQAOr6ODpRXiWWcsCyEGBph9u9GZODSA5Or0E6 P5eBmyf+YJTlhk4vRUsjqZIjE3WnrVmglxvw==
X-GMX-UID: oYwdYBPULi50FHO372tpVo9rZml1ZNgW
Cc: 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="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Sender: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org

Hi Suresh,

thanks for your helpful response!


>> 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,

Okay, if you say that you're against any new proposal that uses hop by hop options combined with router alert, then it could be better to define a new hop-by-hop option, which is only recognized by certain router (regarding mobile ip these routers could be home agents). or you're generally against the using of the hop-by-hop header, regardless of the router alert is used or not?

Thanks a lot

Bernd
-- 
Psssst! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört?
Der kann`s mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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