Hi Vishwas, Am 04.02.2011 18:53, schrieb Vishwas Manral: > The problem is not just about known options here, like I mentioned > earlier. A structure where there is a list which needs to be walked > serially and no fixed place for an information, it is bad for the fast > path.
I see. > I have mentioned cases for how bad it can get for IPv6. One good thing > IPv6 does is it defined the order of options. > > If we want to process connex or some particular option, we could > process it. However there may need to be some assumptions like, the > option is the first in the list of options or any such thing. Personally, I'm not looking for a new option, but I was wondering about Conex trying to redefine/claim common IPv6 header bits for their purpose, which is IMHO worse than using some HbH option. In NSIS we suffered a lot from the Router Alert Option problems... If the current extension mechanisms of IPv6 need some fixes to allow for fast path processing and to be useful in the future at least, someone may consider working on this out... Regards, Roland -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
