Hello,
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 04:07:15PM -0400, Suresh Krishnan wrote :
I have submitted a draft requesting a standard format for IPv6
extension headers. I would appreciate any comments on it.
I think I don't understand why one would need new extension headers,
instead of adding
Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
Hello,
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 04:07:15PM -0400, Suresh Krishnan wrote :
I have submitted a draft requesting a standard format for IPv6
extension headers. I would appreciate any comments on it.
I think I don't understand why one would need new extension
Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
Hello,
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 04:07:15PM -0400, Suresh Krishnan wrote :
I have submitted a draft requesting a standard format for IPv6
extension headers. I would appreciate any comments on it.
I think I don't understand why one would need new extension
I will be out of the office starting 13/10/2006 and will not return until
23/10/2006.
For urgent enquiries please contact Jennifer Emms CSC (0141 957 2299 ).
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
I don't think your comment is a problem.Whether a block of memory is payload or
an extension header is determined by the Next Header value of the immediately
preceding header, not whether the extension header is known or unknown.A node
should pass an unknown extension header to the next header
On Oct 19, 2006, at 3:53 AM, Su Thunder wrote:
I don't think your comment is a problem. Whether a block of memory
is payload or an extension header is determined by the Next Header
value of the immediately preceding header, not whether the
extension header is known or unknown. A node should
Fred Baker wrote:
On Oct 19, 2006, at 3:53 AM, Su Thunder wrote:
I don't think your comment is a problem. Whether a block of memory is
payload or an extension header is determined by the Next Header value
of the immediately preceding header, not whether the extension header
is known or
From draft...
However, some intermediate nodes such as firewalls, may need to
look at the transport layer header fields in order to make a
decision to allow or deny the packet. If new extension headers are
defined and the intermediate node is not aware of them, the
intermediate
Suresh,
[No hats on]
Hi Folks,
I have submitted a draft requesting a standard format for IPv6
extension headers. I would appreciate any comments on it.
I really like reading clear and concise drafts!!! Thanks!
While I agree that the problem that your draft is addressing is real,
I
Hello All,
Does anybody understand whyRFCs propose creating struct sockaddr_storage with
code like
/* * Desired design of maximum size and alignment*/#define _SS_MAXSIZE 128 /* Implementation specific max size */ #define _SS_ALIGNSIZE (sizeof (int64_t)) /* Implementation specific desired
If we can predict that many new extension headers will be defined in the
future,a new draft for the router to recognize the newly defined extension
header will be neccessary.For example,we can define a set of parameters
including the Next Header value in the immediately preceding header,a list
11 matches
Mail list logo
