In your previous mail you wrote:
> * technical constraints: I can't see one?
you will have to buy more memory which is very expensive since you must have
a recursive loop in the packet to find the offset where the transport header
sits - this is doable but much worse than ipv4 where you have the header
length and can find the offset immediatly for the transport header...
=> I don't understand the memory problem: you still need enough memory
to handle the packet... Perhaps you'd like to cache the first bytes in
another (fast and more expensive) memory and in this case the offset
won't help. You should have a particular design in the mind (and of
course you don't want to give all the details in an open list).
> * policy constraints: I am sorry to have to say that but it
> is the job of a ISP to look at inside packets of its
> customers. It is why I said ESP will save us. Of course this should be
> the point where we have a very different opinion, in the past my
> current ISP decided the Web was mainly pornography and tried to limit
> the bandwidth for a particular TCP port...
And as I said I agree with your reasoning here from a principal clean IP
architecture but there are many service providers that want to use this
feature.
=> then your issue is you can't say just no as I can?
Regards
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
