Re: [Spud] New Version Notification for draft-kuehlewind-spud-use-cases-00.txt

[Joe Touch <[e-mail]>]

On 7/8/2015 9:27 AM, Brian Trammell wrote:
>> This is the appropriate
>> > place for the policy/QoS information information described in the use
>> > cases, and there are already facilities for both hop-by-hop options
>> > and allowing middle boxes to modify options inflight.
>
> Indeed. This presumes that new IP options are more realistically
> widely deployable in the Internet than a new protocol over UDP. I would
> need to see some data to back that up (indeed, this would fit nicely in
> a measurement study we're running right now so we may well end up
> generating that data. :) )

Check the discussions over in v6ops.

There has been a lot of work there trying to deprecate all IPv6 options,
which has at least been successful in limiting the length of the option
chain.

One challenge is that IPv6 options are processed differently than IPv4 -
there's no way to "jump" straight into the transport header to find
ports (for port-based load balancing, e.g.).

I suspect you'll find that IP options are basically a non-starter except
for research purposes.

Joe