Hi,
Since there is at least one know popular (but non-attacking) usage of RH0, i.e., probing 'return path' by traceroute, we'll still see non-attacking packets containing RH0.
Except some custom-made traceroute6 and KAME's implementation, I am not aware of such usage of RH0. What I mean here, is that deprecating RH0 won't harm anyone (except some reasearchers). Discovering the 'return path' is a really cool feature, but the discussions during the last weeks proved that RH0 is not the right solution. Its benefit is too small comparing to the problem related to RH0.
Deprecating RH0 seems to be the only reasonable choice. I do not get why some people want a 'disable by default' solution to this problem. Do we need to explain one more time why RH0 MUST NOT be turned on ?
Guillaume -- Guillaume Valadon / ギョーム バラドン [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
