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

["Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <[e-mail]>]

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" ?

-éric 

On 14/04/15 10:41, "Fernando Gont" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Folks,
>
>At the last v6ops meeting, there seemed to be agreement about including
>some text noting that while results indicate that use of IPv6 EHs has
>been found to result in packet drops, at least for transit ASes such
>behavior is undesirable.
>
>So this is a *first try* (please suggest edits to this text if you
>think that's necessary):
>
>"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, in particular,
>packet drops occurring at transits Autonomous Systems is undesirable,
>and it is expected that this situation will improve over time."
>
>Thanks!
>
>Best regards,
>-- 
>Fernando Gont
>SI6 Networks
>e-mail: [e-mail]
>PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
>
>
>
>
>