Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers

Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> Sat, 19 September 2020 09:49 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 25E7D3A0CAF for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 02:49:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 RO7k-QNdZ5ie for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 02:48:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clarinet.employees.org (clarinet.employees.org [198.137.202.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BADD3A0C9E for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 02:48:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain (dhcp193287135.blix.com [193.28.7.135]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by clarinet.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 29B304E11B3B; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 09:48:58 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2020 11:48:55 +0200
Message-Id: <F50F122E-158C-4B2F-803E-A443CD576DDC@employees.org>
References: <b697ce45-3c95-f423-ffb7-34f5976496d9@si6networks.com>
Cc: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <b697ce45-3c95-f423-ffb7-34f5976496d9@si6networks.com>
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18A373)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/JToBQ9NApITozSr376YsdCe2F4w>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers
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: Sat, 19 Sep 2020 09:49:01 -0000


> On 19 Sep 2020, at 09:19, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello, Gyan,
> 
>> On 19/9/20 01:06, Gyan Mishra wrote:
>> Hi Fernando
>> In this draft can we talk add point about the catch 22 situation described in RFC 7045 excerpt below bottom of introduction:
>> I think this issue is critical to the overall issue with processing of EHs and operators filtering EHs in some cases unnecessarily.
> 
> What, specifically, would you like us to say about it?
> 
> Note: RFC6564 has not (and will not) improve the situation in this respect. Since EHs share the same namespece as "upper layer protocols", then, in order for a middlebox to know it can parse a header as in the RFC6564 format, it has to now that the corresponding "protocol number" identifies an EH (as opposed to an upper layer protocol).
> 
> RFC6564 would have been useful only if we had closed the door to the definition of new EHs with a new "protocol number", and had specified that any new EHs would share the same protocol number ("XX", to have been assigned by IANA at the time RFC6564 was published).
> 

Right, but only if the assumption that middleboxes would allow arbitrary headers in between network and transport is true.  That seems unlikely to me. 

Ole


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