On 03/02/2017 21:51, Stefano Previdi (sprevidi) wrote:
On Feb 3, 2017, at 1:37 AM, Brian E Carpenter
<brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
In Section 4 ("IPv6 Extension Headers") the draft says:
With one exception, extension headers are not processed 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.
(FYI, the exception is the hop-by-hop extension header.)
I do not dispute that this sentence reached WG consensus. However, I want
to ask if it has IETF consensus. In my opinion, this sentence should read
With one exception, extension headers are not processed, inserted,
deleted or modified 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.
I believe this was always the intended meaning of the word "processed"
from the earliest design phase of IPv6, but some people have read this
text as allowing insertion, deletion or modification of headers. IMHO
it needs to be clarified.
are we re-spinning the debate on a WG-agreed text ?
Yes. That's what an IETF Last Call is about.
Brian