Earlier, Remi Depres wrote:
> 1. let's assume a new routing extension is found useful.
>    Without a skippable extension format, it won't ever be deployable:
>      - All FWs will have no option but rejecting all packets having it.

In reality, such an extension would use the existing
IPv6 Routing Header (RFC-2460, Section 4.4), and
would define a new "Routing Type" value.  

The IPv6 Routing Header already begins with these 3 fields:
        - Next Header
        - Length of this Routing Header
        - Routing Type

So the IPv6 Routing Header *already* can be skipped if desired.  

More importantly, several existing deployed routers (from multiple 
vendors) that are deployed in the operational public Internet can
already parse past the Routing Header (if desired), for example 
in order to examine the transport-layer protocol and transport-layer 
port-number information -- and can do this today *at wire-speed for
high-speed backbone links*.

>      With this extension format, FWs can first be upgraded to support it, 
>      i.e. so that they ignore unknown extensions marked as "to be ignored if 
> unknown".
>      Then it becomes realistic to create, for example, a new routing option.

As Fernando Gont and others have observed repeatedly, firewalls 
are intentionally designed to drop packets containing unrecognised
options/extensions -- regardless of what "action bits" might suggest.  

In short, your assumption that significant numbers of deployed
IPv6-capable firewalls would in fact "ignore unknown extensions/options" 
is not a valid assumption.

If one wants to create a new routing option, the BEST chance of
that new routing idea being deployable is to re-use the existing 
IPv6 Routing Header and define a new Routing Type value.

(I consider it unlikely that anyone would create such a routing
enhancement proposal, but if someone did, then reusing the 
existing IPv6 Routing Header would be the BEST chance for deployment.)

Yours,

Ran


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

Reply via email to