IETF Logo Mail Archive

[v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers - implementation-dependency

Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com> Mon, 27 July 2020 09:22 UTC

Return-Path: <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com>
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 813173A17F4; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 02:22:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 u6GcvE19m2XQ; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 02:22:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C4463A17ED; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 02:22:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml739-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.108]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id C8C8AE0D1572BA81D5F7; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 10:22:20 +0100 (IST)
Received: from msceml703-chm.china.huawei.com (10.219.141.161) by lhreml739-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.189) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 10:22:20 +0100
Received: from msceml703-chm.china.huawei.com (10.219.141.161) by msceml703-chm.china.huawei.com (10.219.141.161) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 12:22:19 +0300
Received: from msceml703-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.219.141.161]) by msceml703-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.219.141.161]) with mapi id 15.01.1913.007; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 12:22:19 +0300
From: Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.eduard@huawei.com>
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops@ietf.org" <draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers - implementation-dependency
Thread-Index: AdZj9zFJtjveS0eYRluv5AthxXDk5Q==
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 09:22:19 +0000
Message-ID: <daa1c0efd47f47cfa9c2cffe4c917930@huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.47.200.156]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/CzP1FkXLJx7JOHZuKxw0sVZEzCQ>
Subject: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers - implementation-dependency
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 09:22:27 -0000

Hi Fernando,
You did mention "implementation-dependent" in security section. But majority of people would bypass security section on the 1st pass of reading your draft.
Except security people, others would look to functionality 1st, them may be security (may be not:-(). Hence, you almost ignore "implementation-dependency" in such a way (putting it into security section).
I propose to introduce additional 5.x, because (IMHO) "implementation-dependency" is the biggest problem in this draft - it is related to money/expenses (especially to replace hardware).
It would be even bigger problem on next years with proliferation of SRv6, iFit, iOAM, BIERv6 and other abuses of IPv6 headers extensibility.
People need to check hardware (and software) capability far in advance, or else could be negative surprise. Warn them.
Eduard
-----Original Message-----
From: v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Fernando Gont
Sent: 26 июля 2020 г. 8:46
To: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops@ietf.org
Subject: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-04.txt)

Folks,

We have posted a rev of our IETF I-D "Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers".

The I-D is available at: 
https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-04.txt

Your feedback will be appreciated.

Thanks!

Cheers,
Fernando




-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification for
draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-04.txt
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2020 22:28:50 -0700
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, Gert Doering <gert@space.net>, Geoff Huston <gih@apnic.net>, Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>, Nick Hilliard <nick@inex.ie>


A new version of I-D, draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-04.txt
has been successfully submitted by Fernando Gont and posted to the IETF repository.

Name:		draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops
Revision:	04
Title:		Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers
Document date:	2020-07-25
Group:		Individual Submission
Pages:		15
URL: 
https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-04.txt
Status: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops/
Htmlized: 
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-04
Htmlized: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops
Diff: 
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-04

Abstract:
    This document summarizes the security and operational implications of
    IPv6 extension headers, and attempts to analyze reasons why packets
    with IPv6 extension headers may be dropped in the public Internet.

 


Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat



_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email