Folks, There was a very significant discussion during the IETF LC to make it crystal clear that IPv6 EHs cannot be inserted. This is clearly codified in RFC8200.
Are the two documents referenced bellow going against the RFC8200 standard? Thanks, Fernando On 30/8/19 12:52, li zhenqiang wrote: > Hello all, > > End.B6.Insert specified in draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-01 > will insert a new SRH in the received IPv6 packet, which results in two > SRHs in one IPv6 packet. It is contradict with RFC8200 that says Each > extension header should occur at most once, except for the Destination > Options header. > > In draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion-06, an intermediate node > executes the insert function to implement a sub-50 milliseconds FRR > operation upon link failure. It is contradict with RFC8200 that > says Extension headers (except for the Hop-by-Hop Options header) are > not processed, inserted, or deleted by any node along a packet’s > delivery path, until the packet reaches the node (or each of the set of > nodes, in the case of multicast) identified in the Destination Address > field of the IPv6 header. > > Best Regards, > Zhenqiang Li > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > li_zhenqi...@hotmail.com > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > i...@ietf.org > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- Fernando Gont e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@si6networks.com PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1 _______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
