On 06/ 9/10 09:32 AM, Jonathan Hui wrote:

We have updated both draft-hui-6man-rpl-routing-header as well as
draft-hui-6man-rpl-option-header based on feedback from Anaheim as well
as discussions on the ML.

Summary of changes:
- Specify a maximum size for header/option so that it is possible to
avoid MTU issues within a RPL domain
- IP-in-IP tunneling is used when a header/option must be inserted into
an existing packet
- Expanded text on requirements and checks on RH4 processing needed to
avoid amplification attacks

Comments/feedback appreciated as always.

When IPv6-in-IPv6 tunneling is used, what is the destination IP address in the outer header? Normally it would be the router that would strip the outer header and RH4. Is that the case here as well?

It wasn't clear to me whether you are proposing IPv6-in-IPv6 tunneling for packets that come in via a border router.

   Erik
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to