Hi Tony, Tony Hain wrote: > Havard Eidnes wrote: >> <counter-rant> >> >> All this monomanic ISP-bashing needs to stop now, if IPv6 is ever >> to take off in any manner. >> >> The claim that RH0 is "just a tool" and that there is no >> "amplification" >> is narrow-sighted at best, since I understood from what has been >> discussed here that it can indeed cause excessive bandwith utilization >> along a path, and is therefore a much too useful tool in a miscreant's >> hand to let loose on the unsuspecting masses. > > So fix it by restricting the number of waypoints. Killing it only prevents > valid uses.
I am thinking that it is easier to fix by deprecating RH0 and then defining a new routing header with stricter properties. Similar to the MIPv6 routing header. That way, the safer RH option can be clearly identified in the wild and won't be blocked/restricted/blocked by filters meant to protect networks/nodes from the RH0 attacks. Regards, Brian -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
