Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-taylor-v6ops-fragdrop

[Joe Touch <[e-mail]>]

Well, I see only the word "should" here. Given how vendors already 
ignore "musts", I doubt we can expect them to be held to "shoulds".

I agree with the intent, but am suggesting that any update on this issue 
might take the opportunity to clarify intent.

Joe

On 11/8/2012 1:05 PM, Bob Hinden wrote:
>
> On Nov 8, 2012, at 2:05 PM, Ole Trøan wrote:
>
>> Joe,
>>
>>> There's remains other problematic language in 2460, however:
>>>
>>>   Each extension header should occur at most once, except for the
>>>   Destination Options header which should occur at most twice (once
>>>   before a Routing header and once before the upper-layer header).
>>>
>>> So it still seems open to have more than one HBH header, which certainly complicates things even though they'd be clearly marked.
>>
>> I don't see how you can read that to imply you can have more than one Hop-by-Hop extension header.
>> my reading (and what I think the _intention_ of the text was) is that there can only be one Hop-By-Hop extension header, and
>> that the HBH header must be the first extension header in the chain. this way routers only need to check the Next Header field
>> for the value of 0.
>
> +1
>
> Bob
>