On Jun 13, 2013 1:18 AM, "Randy Bush" wrote:
>
> > FWIW, I don't think anyone has proposed "if the chain is larger than X,
> > then drop".
>
> i am saying that i am telling my neighbor that, if the header length is
> larger than X, it is likely that their packet will not propagate. it's
> an ops
On Jun 10, 2013 8:56 PM, "Brian E Carpenter"
wrote:
>
> On 11/06/2013 15:44, cb.list6 wrote:
> > On Jun 10, 2013 8:34 PM, "Brian E Carpenter" <
brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> On 11/06/2013 15:21, cb.list6 wrote:
> >>&
On Jun 10, 2013 8:34 PM, "Brian E Carpenter"
wrote:
>
> On 11/06/2013 15:21, cb.list6 wrote:
> > On Jun 10, 2013 7:23 PM, "Fernando Gont" wrote:
> >> Folks,
> >>
> >> We're currently editing the aforementioned I-D. So far, the I-D
On Jun 10, 2013 7:23 PM, "Fernando Gont" wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
> We're currently editing the aforementioned I-D. So far, the I-D just
> required that the entire IPv6 header chain be present in the first
fragment.
>
> Based on recent/ongoing discussions on the 6man and v6ops lists, there
> seems to b
