Hi, On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 03:27:50PM +0200, [email protected] wrote: > > So we all agree that 'variable length is OK as long as our hardware > > can look deep enough'? And what people are complaining about is exact > > number? Which we do not know yet for IPv6 EHs? > > Agreed, variable length *by itself* is not the problem. > > I see *large* variable length headers, in combination with complex > parsing rules, as the problem.
(*large* variable headers) exactly, plus fragmentation and "ambiguities" wrt fragmentable vs. unfragmentable part and how headers point to the next one once there's a cut between them due to fragmentation. the, what we consider, "problem space" is much larger, unfortunately. thanks Enno > > Steinar Haug, AS 2116 > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops -- Enno Rey ERNW GmbH - Carl-Bosch-Str. 4 - 69115 Heidelberg - www.ernw.de Tel. +49 6221 480390 - Fax 6221 419008 - Cell +49 173 6745902 Handelsregister Mannheim: HRB 337135 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Enno Rey ======================================================= Blog: www.insinuator.net || Conference: www.troopers.de Twitter: @Enno_Insinuator =======================================================
