Re: [v6ops] draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-in-real-world: clarification text

[Fernando Gont <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Eric,

On 04/17/2015 04:17 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote:
> Fernando
> 
> Your proposal is fine for me, but, I would suggest a slightly stronger
> text:
> "The results presented in this document indicate that in the scenarios
> where the corresponding measurements were performed, the use of IPv6
> extension headers can lead to packet drops. We note that
> packet drops occurring at transit networks is undesirable
> and it is hoped and expected that this situation will improve over time."
> 
> Should we say something around the lines of "... Undesirable except when
> Those packets cannot be forwarded without impacting the performance and
> the health of the network devices" ?

I'm fine with the text you suggest.

The only comment/question is that there are two conflicting povs: frm
the use pov, he'd probably like his packets to go through transparently,
and hence the packet drops are undesirable (no matter what). But from
the network operator pov, the packet drops aren't undesireable (ot one
culd say that they really are.. in the sense that the network operator
would be glad to not need to drop these packets).

Thanks!

Cheers,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: [e-mail]
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492