On 04/20/2018 12:42 AM, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) wrote: [....] > */[acm] /* > > *That’s heavy baggage 6man will have to carry, IMO.* > > *“are not” doesn’t translate to a requirement in any SDO I know.* > > > > RFC8250 does not involve Extension header insertion/deletion > > along the path, but other work-in-progress (in-situ OAM) would. Well, it should not. RFC8200 seems to be crystal clear in this respect, and we burned a sensible number of electrons to get there. > o Extension Header insertion or deletion: Although such behavior is > > not endorsed by current standards, it is possible that Extension > > Headers could be added to, or removed from the header chain. The > > resulting packet may be standard-formed, with a corresponding > > Type-P. Strongly disagree, for the reasons stated above. -- Fernando Gont SI6 Networks e-mail: fgont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
