I also don’t think this is ready for a w.g. last call. It doesn’t reference the new version of the IPv6 specification RFC8200. There were a number of clarifications in RFC8200 regarding extension headers that may require changes in the draft.
For example, Hop by Hop headers are now a “may” in RFC8200, but this draft says: The Hop-by-Hop Options header is used to carry optional information that should be examined by every node along a packet's delivery path. This doesn’t match what is in RFC8200: The Hop-by-Hop Options header is not inserted or deleted, but may be examined or processed by any node along a packet's delivery path,… I didn’t do a through review after I saw it didn’t reference RFC8200, but I suspect there are other things that need to be changed to match RFC8200. I think the authors need to do detailed review and publish a new draft. Regard, Bob > On Sep 29, 2017, at 1:12 AM, Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > This is to open a two week WGLC for > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering-03. > If you have not read it, please do so now. You may send nits to the author, > but substantive discussion should go to the [email protected] list. > (While V6OPS WG is in cc because of close alignment with the WG expertise > area, may we ask to send feedback and comments in the OPSEC WG) > > We will close the call on 13 October 2017 > > Gunter & Eric > OPSEC WG co-chairs > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ OPSEC mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
