Re: Consensus call on adopting draft-krishnan-ipv6-exthdr

2010-04-29 Thread james woodyatt
On Apr 29, 2010, at 17:38, Suresh Krishnan wrote: > > Fully agree. Do you think such restriction needs to be mentioned in the IANA > considerations section of this draft? I think 6MAN should consider it. I'd be interested to see reasons to think that making such an instruction to IANA would be

Re: Consensus call on adopting draft-krishnan-ipv6-exthdr

2010-04-29 Thread Suresh Krishnan
Hi James, On 10-04-29 02:16 PM, james woodyatt wrote: On Apr 26, 2010, at 06:17, Brian Haberman wrote: The 6MAN chairs would like feedback from the working group on adopting draft-krishnan-ipv6-exthdr as a WG item. Please send your comments/opinions to the mailing list (or the chairs) by

Re: Consensus call on adopting draft-krishnan-ipv6-exthdr

2010-04-29 Thread Suresh Krishnan
Hi Hagen, On 10-04-29 01:53 PM, Hagen Paul Pfeifer wrote: PS: why does the document do not mentioned the authentication extention header? Others (Alex/Brian/Remi) have also pointed this out. It is an omission and will be fixed in the next version of the draft. Thanks Suresh ---

Re: Consensus call on adopting draft-krishnan-ipv6-exthdr

2010-04-29 Thread james woodyatt
On Apr 26, 2010, at 06:17, Brian Haberman wrote: > > The 6MAN chairs would like feedback from the working group on adopting > draft-krishnan-ipv6-exthdr as a WG item. Please send your comments/opinions > to the mailing list (or the chairs) by May 7, 2010. I don't object to 6MAN taking up t

Re: Consensus call on adopting draft-krishnan-ipv6-exthdr

2010-04-29 Thread Hagen Paul Pfeifer
* Brian Haberman | 2010-04-26 08:17:11 [-0400]: >All, > The 6MAN chairs would like feedback from the working group on >adopting draft-krishnan-ipv6-exthdr as a WG item. Please send your >comments/opinions to the mailing list (or the chairs) by May 7, 2010. +1, to adopt this draft as a workin

Re: Consensus call on adopting draft-krishnan-ipv6-exthdr

2010-04-29 Thread Rémi Després
Hi Suresh, Le 27 avr. 2010 à 17:09, Suresh Krishnan a écrit : > ... > I am fine with adding the shim6,AH, and ESP into the exception list. Do you > think that this exception list is useful? Indeed: - The GIEH new extension header is for *future* extensions. - It is too late for "existing" ones

Re: Consensus call on adopting draft-krishnan-ipv6-exthdr

2010-04-29 Thread Rémi Després
Le 26 avr. 2010 à 22:52, Stig Venaas a écrit : > Wes Beebee (wbeebee) wrote: >> I support this effort as I think it will "future proof" extension >> headers as far as stateful firewalls are concerned - but what I'm >> interested in is finding out how much demand for new extension headers >> there

Re: Consensus call on adopting draft-krishnan-ipv6-exthdr

2010-04-29 Thread Rémi Després
Brian, Bob, > The 6MAN chairs would like feedback from the working group on adopting > draft-krishnan-ipv6-exthdr as a WG item. Please send your comments/opinions > to the mailing list (or the chairs) by May 7, 2010. +1 for draft-krishnan-ipv6-exthdr to become a WG item. Rergards, RD -