Fernando, >> The takeaway I attempted to highlight is that there is in fact agreement >> between 6man and spring on how to proceed, and we are proceeding as >> agreed to work on the relevant documents. > > I don't really know what the agreement is, other than the implicit > agreement that if you're considering violating an IPv6 standard, you > should come to 6man and do a Std Track document that updates the > relevant standard...
if there ever is a corner case were header insertion can be done safely, and the issues it creates mitigated, then that should certainly not result in an update to the general rule in 8200. Ole _______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
