In your previous mail you wrote:
> ==> Security considerations should mention potential problems of crossing
> zone boundaries w/ routing headers.
>
> => as the rules forbid this there is no need for extra considerations.
This would appear to be in conflict what it says in the draft:
Thus, it is possible, though generally inadvisable, to
use a Routing Header to convey a non-global address across its
associated zone boundary.
or is there some nuance I'm missing?
=> perhaps you don't understand the draft remark: the idea is there may be
a non-global address in previous destinations which is outside of the
current zone. I believe this is no security issue or utility for this
feature.
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
