Joe, > FWIW, I wouldn't mind: > > - IPv6 *should* limit its header chains to (some reasonable limit) > > What I expect when that's not the case: > > - SOME packets get through, perhaps more slowly > - when the router can't keep up, it can drop the overload > > This isn't any different from many other things, e.g., when a router can't > keep up with IPv6 packets that overload an egress. > > However, anything that says "if the chain is >X, then drop" is broken, > period. At some point, if you want to play "IPv6 router", you need to earn > the title.
an IPv6 router compliant with RFC2460 does not inspect the header chain. I'm not aware of any router that drop packets with extension headers. I'm aware of network operators applying filtering policy that results in packets with extension headers being dropped. it would be very interesting to see where in the network those policies are used. my assumption was on Enterprise border, and that packets go across the Internet unhindered, as well as inside of Enterprises. it would be interesting if someone could test that. RIPE Atlas? or if operators on the list would share what the filter where and why. just to be clear I'm not against the IETF documenting e.g. in a BCP, what the longest expected header chain should be. cheers, Ole _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
