> options header is not sufficient for those cases. However, if the WG > things it can not or should not ban end-to-end extension > headers, then > having a document giving them a more regular format still seems worth > while to me.
Which is more or less what that draft does. If you require a draft to document a regular standardized format then that means that you are open to the idea of defining new extension headers in the future. If that's the case then why not use GIEH? Cheers, Manav > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
