Re: Routing Header Type 0 way forward

[itojun at itojun.org (Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0)]

> On 16-mei-2007, at 10:05, Ebalard, Arnaud wrote:
> 
> > Should (can) something like the following be added to the draft ?:
> > "Conformant implementations of IPv6 hosts and routers MUST not
> > provide a way to activate RH0 processing on the system."
> 
> This is a very bad idea for two reasons:
> 
> 1. The IPv6 spec says that you MUST implement it, then having  
> something else say you MUST NOT actually use it is just bad standards  
> making
> 
> 2. Maybe someone has a legitimate use for this, they should be able  
> to do so if they want

	how many times do i have to post this: there's ZERO RFCs that use
	rthdr0.  nuke it immediately for the sake of world peace.

	as the firm believer of running code (not the spec), i urge you to
	look at http://www.kame.net/newsletter/20070502/rthdr0.diff.txt
	and check out the comments.

itojun

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6 at ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------