Hi Ignatious, You are right, however it will depend on what uses such implementations are used for. As such a routing header is end-to-end.
That said another thing to keep in mind is that the situation is no different to adding some new feature to IPv6, with the advantage that the behavior in case the RH4 header is not recognized by a node is well defined. Thanks, Vishwas On 8/30/07, Ignatios Souvatzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 09:39:32PM +1000, Vishwas Manral wrote: > > Hi Ignatious, > > > > Quoting the RFC2460: > > > > With one exception, of Hop-by-hop extension headers are not examined > > or processed by any node along a packet's delivery path, until the packet > > reaches the node (or each of the set of nodes, in the case of multicast) > > identified in the Destination Address field of the IPv6 header. > > > > So in a way you are right, but again it we may want to test the > > routing path from any router in the network to any other router in the > > network. > > Well, if those routers aren't *your* routers, I'm afraid you'll need > the owners' coöperation to the extend that they install RH4-capable > firmware. > > Not much different from the IPv4 situation, I guess? > > -is > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
