Hi Suresh,
Cheers,
As you requested one of many quotes from the draft which your clarification to 2460bis directly contradicts with:
This include either:
A host originating an IPv6 packet.
An SR domain ingress router encapsulating a received IPv6 packet
into an outer IPv6 header followed by an SRH.
R.
On Mar 31, 2017 10:32, "Suresh Krishnan" <suresh.krishnan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Robert,On Mar 31, 2017, at 9:11 AM, Robert Raszuk <robert@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:I do not understand how 2460bis makes it "easier" if proposed change to the text directly tries to prohibit what is described in a document already long time back accepted as a 6man working group draft.First of all, adopting something as a working group document only means that it is a starting point. Adoption of a document does not mean that there is WG agrees with all the text in the document. That is why the document goes under WG change control.Secondly, I have no idea what you are talking about in this specific case. What work indo you think is prohibited by this text? Can please provide a text quote from the draft?ThanksSuresh