Hi, Mike,

Thanks again for your feedback! Comments in-line....

On 08/21/2014 11:53 AM, C. M. Heard wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2014, Fernando Gont wrote:
>> On 08/20/2014 04:20 PM, C. M. Heard wrote:
>>> Alternative advice:
>>>    Intermediate systems should discard packets containing these 
>>>    extension headers.  This policy could be overridden in specific 
>>>    environments where the experimental headers are used.
>>
>> The thing is that "this policy could be overriden.." sounds a bit like
>> defining configuration defaults. mm.. how about:
>>
>>     Intermediate systems should discard packets containing these
>>     extension headers.  Only in in specific scenarios in which
>>     experiments are to be performed, an operator may want to permit
>>     these extension headers.
> 
> That works for me (as do the other tweaks of a similar nature that 
> you suggested).  I suggested the text "This policy could be 
> overridden ..." because it appeared elsewhere in the draft.  If you 
> don't like it here, you may want to do a "search and destroy" 
> mission to root it out in other places where it appears.

It would work for *me*. But I guess tweaking the text a bit might avoid
confusion to others.. -- I will proceed with the search & destroy as
indicated. :-)


>>> General comment on Section 4, advice about options:  should the 
>>> advice be nuanced to distinguish between cases where an option 
>>> appears in a Hop-by-Hop option header vs a Destination Options 
>>> header?
>>
>> Yes. Even if te advice ends up being the same. I will check if there are
>> any options (other than the padding ones) that cane be included in
>> different EH types (of the top of my head, most of the options are meant
>> for specific EH types).
> 
> As far as I could tell, the padding options are the only ones that 
> are allowed to appear in both kinds of option extension headers.

So I guess that for the most part, there's no need of a "per-EH-type"
kind of policy for IPv6 options?

Thanks!

Best regards,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: [email protected]
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492




_______________________________________________
OPSEC mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec

Reply via email to