Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
>>Secondly, I don't think that the addressing architecture should
>>forbid the use of the address in an extension header. That is
>>for the extension header to define.
>
>
> in which kind of extension header IPv4 mapped address make sense?
> certainly not the extension header.
>
> itojun
There is no point forbidding it from the Destination Options as
one example. Some new option at some point in time might want
to use a mapped address. There should be a specific prohibition
on it.
Additionally (and what I was trying to say before), the addressing
architecture does not and should not talk about extension header and
what's permitted in them.
-vlad
--
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Vladislav Yasevich Tru64 UNIX - IPv6 Project Lead
Hewlett Packard Tel: (603) 884-1079
Nashua, NH 03062 ZKO3-3/T07
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
