Hi Hemant, Please find responses inline. Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote: > Tatuya, > > I understand receiver vs. sender. I am talking about the fact that RFC > 2460 says no intermediate node may inspect/process any EH besides the > HBH EH. That is the reason for which I quote this para from section 4 of > RFC 2460: > > [With one exception, extension headers are not examined or processed > by any node along a packet's delivery path, until the packet reaches > the node (or each of the set of nodes, in the case of multicast) > identified in the Destination Address field of the IPv6 header.]
This text is not normative, as you can clearly see. "headers are not" is way different from "headers must not be" > > This text would prohibit a firewall, which is an intermediate node, to > inspect/process any EH. I also asked if any RFC exists that changed this > behavior from RFC 2460 to allow an intermediate node like a firewall to > inspect/process EH's besides the HBH. > > > I agree with you that a receiver may process the EH's in any order > except the HBH EH. No. The receiver MUST process the extension headers in the order they appear. Please see the following text from RFC2460 > Yes, my concern with text from Suresh's draft was indeed that HBH was not > mentioned with > > " o Extension headers must be processed in any order they appear" I already suggested replacement text for this in my earlier mail. Did you not receive it? Anyway the intent of this text was to say " o Extension headers must be processed in any order they appear" Thanks Suresh -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
