IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] WG Doc? draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops

otroan@employees.org Wed, 16 March 2016 17:38 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5292412D652 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:38:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.002
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=employees.org; domainkeys=pass (1024-bit key) header.from=otroan@employees.org header.d=employees.org
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aGdY4LjazqDR for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:38:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cowbell.employees.org (cowbell.employees.org [65.50.211.142]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CF4412DA68 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:38:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cowbell.employees.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cowbell.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CD66D7881; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:38:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=employees.org; h=subject :mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id :references:to; s=selector1; bh=58bLtVUt40cQX8wgm3f85XGCi2o=; b= ra4rYQ2Wr0w5A5YMvpb5lHIonySNiKo3e9VAy3k0P02Fr9vHapoYP8fHPX1zGz/o xxxMxVBswfL+QVHInYLzM/Bjn4iWgPwI0AvKjsHoT9f5pFKCZMdClxEPiynmmPFH /f+gN6e6qiDwMp2QEJBc3jRINYScp1A8O1gkOcoMDGc=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=employees.org; h=subject :mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id :references:to; q=dns; s=selector1; b=TMBapPA6/HudlLBf3FKpEbAfg/ SdOw184/GvycNIOd7Ys3KytMgbb0Hqm4hy2HObkgM2ylLbMjhgVcaTRFWAzUacwS FPi+iky5O8Ky0hEz7DOLgDsv7mMIIvDTGxpd0HxosqFhSBJaZrGPt2ZZNqAT77T0 2/59MK8fxJzRNVVfo=
Received: from h.hanazo.no (cm-84.215.10.233.getinternet.no [84.215.10.233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: otroan) by cowbell.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 41CDFD7884; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:38:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by h.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49AE312AE2E5; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 18:38:13 +0100 (CET)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_797800AC-C1A3-4586-84FB-4E0DF9C63005"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.6b2
From: otroan@employees.org
In-Reply-To: <56E98086.5040209@foobar.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 18:38:12 +0100
Message-Id: <EE17974D-EDA4-4732-B29E-B2B3BC36DB86@employees.org>
References: <A277BE71-BD70-4AFE-97DA-F224D7DBBCB8@cisco.com> <F57DFD38-FC99-45AE-B41D-51B0565148B1@employees.org> <CALx6S37vNXk-g=W4n_Qvd2J=7xkgydvGEUwrhu8pRQig0hoqLg@mail.gmail.com> <1BB37194-0F5B-45C1-9DFA-87B1C28264D2@employees.org> <CALx6S37vfDcchTa5Tch+BS8rQAGgPP_EeYbVz19WBchSHTqExg@mail.gmail.com> <56E60B0D.6070600@gmail.com> <CALx6S36_Vi4XZfPvCNY42zpbXy9dXeXzwE8KedxYDhne371HHA@mail.gmail.com> <56E6326B.2090303@gmail.com> <CALx6S353ognNHWnjbNSdW5hb_e6Hv3LqLa_r+e9yEW4F=cjH=A@mail.gmail.com> <56E6FC18.1060304@foobar.org> <CALx6S35pcSj_LLnDWJ68KwSYiHeu6FwrXTaR4N2xE6aY7MRO1A@mail.gmail.com> <CAHw9_iLbqEvsw0x4dDcA3Zy3SXKUROcQuy5nSynsL9Xi+xrZLg@mail.gmail.com> <566C93D0-62FF-4700-BC05-7F9AF12AF1BD@employees.org> <56E892B8.9030902@foobar.org> <394925FE-FAB1-4FFC-B1CF-4F64CC58F613@employees.org> <56E94275.20700@foobar.org> <3AE1DE20-D735-4262-A3FB-7C01F30BAFA2@employees.org> <56E96F74.7000206@foobar.org> <CALx6S37zP4UvCtBJsvnPN6OmDB0OQDMfRrJNy1XF0t4COStUjQ@mail.gmail.com> <56E98086.504 0209@foobar.org>
To: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/-_eiumlQyHtGRcJXzcS6ih8u--U>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] WG Doc? draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 17:38:46 -0000

Nick,

>> Processing an unbounded chain of EHs is probably a problem for anyone
>> at this point.
> 
> exactly, which is what this draft is attempting to document.

making processing of extension headers hard was considered by Steve to be a feature.

that's well known. it just isn't clear to me what you are trying to achieve with this draft?
on one hand it alludes to why L4 information might be required in the network, on the other it says why routers aren't able to process the EH chain...

Best regards,
Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email