Hi, Haisheng Yu,
On 26/5/23 06:14, Haisheng Yu (Johnson) wrote:
[....]
The essence of the extension header issue is determined by the
competition between operators and equipment vendors.For most internet
users, they rely on the default configurations provided by the operators
or equipment vendors. Operators always want devices from vendors that
offer powerful features (e.g., in SRv6, equipment vendors aim to support
as many layers of Segment Routing lists as possible). However, during
actual deployment, only a portion of these features is used due to
security concerns. Equipment vendors are motivated to innovate as they
seek to outperform their competitors and gain profits in the market.
The extension headers in IPv6 provide a significant advantage beyond the
address space of IPv4, enabling flexible and programmable network
transmissions. Looking at the current applications of IPv6 extension
headers, notable achievements have been made (such as SRv6). Perhaps
it's time to consider reducing restrictions on extension headers and
allow for more innovation and application.
I'm super fine with folks that have a use for EHs, to use them. -- And I
agree that for vendors it's an interesting source fo revenue.
That said, I'm not that fine if invited to a party where, if anything, I
will only pay the bills. So, I block everything that I don't use. e.g.,
I have no use for EHs in any of my servers, except the pentesting boxes
that I use to send weird packets to others.
Cheers,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: [email protected]
PGP Fingerprint: F242 FF0E A804 AF81 EB10 2F07 7CA1 321D 663B B494
_______________________________________________
OPSEC mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
