Re: [OPSEC] IETF WG state changed for draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering for 2 weeks

Section 3.4.2.5 contradicts section 3.3 on handling of unknown RHT’s.
Section 3.4.2.5 contradicts section 3.4.2.4 assessment of operational impact.

It appears to me that 3.4.3.5 should state:
Intermediate systems should discard packets containing a RHT0 or
RHT1.  Other routing header types should be permitted.

Darren

> On May 29, 2018, at 11:04 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyncke@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> [Sent to OPSEC, 6MAN and V6OPS mailing list]
> 
> As discussed at our last OSPEC WG meeting, this is to open a two-week WGLC for:
>    https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering/
> 
> If you have not read it, please do so now. You may send nits to the author, but substantive discussion should go to the opsec@ietf.org list.
> 
> (While V6OPS & 6MAN WG are in cc because of close alignment with the WG expertise area, may we ask to send feedback and comments in the OPSEC WG ?)
> 
> We will close the call on 12 June 2018.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> -éric & -ron (OPSEC WG co-chairs)
> 
> On 29/05/18 16:21, "IETF Secretariat" <ietf-secretariat-reply@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> 
>    The IETF WG state of draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering has been changed to
>    "In WG Last Call" from "WG Document" by Éric Vyncke:
> 
>    https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering/
> 
>    Comment:
>    The consensus at IETF-101 meeting was that the document is ready for WGLC.
>    So, let's open a 2-week WGLC.
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------