>> 3) Use HbH anyway. There is hardware that can ignore it. >> There is hardware that can parse it. We coudl certainly >> couple that with discouraging all such use. > > +1 to everything above. > > To me, (3) -- including advice explaining why the hop-by-hop behaviour is > problematic -- seems like a sensible approach.
There is actually an advantage to having a single "hop by hop" option. It means that by default everything else is end-to-end. Routers can thus "just forward it" without violating any IETF recommendation. That's much simpler than having to maintain a table of which payload require intermediate processing and which don't. -- Christian Huitema -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
