On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 11:25:59 +0100, Alan Davy <ad...@tssg.org> wrote: > The point of our proposed solution is to specify a common set of rules > or guidelines for managing the entry of data into the hop by hop option > header data field. The hop by hop option can be ignored by routers that > do not support it or blocked by edge routers that do not like/recognise > it.
I wonder how that is possible. Middleboxes want to find the transport header, and often don't like in-band data that they don't understand (think of NATs and firewalls). Also hardware is often optimized for the case that there is no hop-by-hop header. If there is, I understand in many cases, packet processing will go through "slow path". It's irrelevant whether your extension can be safely ignored - it will still incur some processing overhead in any case. And *I* am only answering your question why many people do not like HbH. I am not a network gear vendor or operator myself. -- Rémi Denis-Courmont -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
