> >The lower bound is probably 53. There's a lowest common denominator>
>problem if you expect to be able to find an l4 header as part of your
> >forwarding decision
>
> Guys,
>
> 53 = not good. Just because some people are re-using old hardware cards they
> had hanging around does not mean everyone has to go along with it.
>>Last time I bought one of that particular arch boxes new was in 2011. I
>>don't have any in my current network but things don't age out of the internet
>>as quickly as I can change jobs, certainly not in enterprises either.
Sure. I don't even want to get started on war stories of the kind of equipment
/ software protocols some of our folks have hanging around. I totally know
that but I don't encourage them buying more of the same either!
I suppose what I am thinking is that since there are no "IETF Police", then the
only "teeth" there are in the standards is the ability to say "this is not
compliant". That is not a trivial thing. People pay attention to that.
If there is consensus that EH's are valuable - then, maybe the way forward
should be to:
1. Decide how to get to the L4 header best.
2. Maybe a recommendation on how much of the header should be read into ASIC.
Is that out of scope?
Nalini
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
