Hi all,
The text changes in version -16 of this draft for the resolution of Alissa
Cooper’s DISCUSS position resulted in lively discussion on the mailing list.
The authors have made another revision of the draft (version -17) to address
the comments raised during this discussion. If you believ
>> Taking "the IPsec approach" would be creating a new extension header
>> and code point that is unique to IPv4-- I don't see how that's any
>> better than just using an existing EH defined for IPv6.
>
> I'm not sure I agree with that.
>
> When we added IPsec to IPv4, a system that didn't imple
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 8:38 AM Fred Baker wrote:
>
>
>
> On Oct 1, 2019, at 11:14 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> > Taking "the IPsec approach" would be creating a new extension header
> > and code point that is unique to IPv4-- I don't see how that's any
> > better than just using an existing EH define
On Oct 1, 2019, at 11:14 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> Taking "the IPsec approach" would be creating a new extension header
> and code point that is unique to IPv4-- I don't see how that's any
> better than just using an existing EH defined for IPv6.
I'm not sure I agree with that.
When we added
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 7:45 AM Joe Touch wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 1, 2019, at 1:45 AM, Frank Brockners (fbrockne)
> > wrote:
> >
> > Expanding from Bob's preference: IMHO it would make sense to explore what
> > we can solve with extension headers (HbyH and DO) - rather than argue the
> > past o
> On Oct 1, 2019, at 1:45 AM, Frank Brockners (fbrockne)
> wrote:
>
> Expanding from Bob's preference: IMHO it would make sense to explore what we
> can solve with extension headers (HbyH and DO) - rather than argue the past
> or judge from the past. Hardware is changing - and what used to b
Expanding from Bob's preference: IMHO it would make sense to explore what we
can solve with extension headers (HbyH and DO) - rather than argue the past or
judge from the past. Hardware is changing - and what used to be the case, does
not necessarily hold true in present or the future.
Back in
