On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 13:06:26 +0200, Libor Polčák wrote: > Unfortunately, I believe that if we want to fix extension headers we > have to obsolete the current model and introduce a new one. For example > allow only L4 protocol numbers in IPv6 header or a special value > indicating that extension headers are present. Then, after IPv6 header, > something like the data structure proposed in the I-D will follow. So > the special header would list next extension header type, L4 protocol > type and IPv6 payload offset. After the special header, current > extension headers will follow in the same manner as they are constructed
> in present. The only exception will be the last header which will not > list any next header. Hello Libor, ich published a I-D: "IPv6 Extension Headers Reserved Space" http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pfeifer-6man-exthdr-res-01 which try to address some of the problems. Introducing a new "number model" don't work, but maybe a solution somewhere between - as presented in the I-D - may address the problem adequate. Cheers, Hagen -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
