Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-6man-eh-limits-16
review-ietf-6man-eh-limits-16-artart-lc-levine-2024-11-22-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-6man-eh-limits
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 18)
Type Last Call Review
Team ART Area Review Team (artart)
Deadline 2024-12-05
Requested 2024-11-21
Authors Tom Herbert
I-D last updated 2024-11-22
Completed reviews Tsvart Last Call review of -16 by Gorry Fairhurst (diff)
Artart Last Call review of -16 by John R. Levine (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -16 by Jon Geater (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -17 by Peter E. Yee (diff)
Assignment Reviewer John R. Levine
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-6man-eh-limits by ART Area Review Team Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/art/FYcjz705VSpI_FFpinuWDffjvhg
Reviewed revision 16 (document currently at 18)
Result Ready w/nits
Completed 2024-11-22
review-ietf-6man-eh-limits-16-artart-lc-levine-2024-11-22-00
For someone not steeped in IPv6 lore, reading this draft feels like arriving
during Act Three of a five-act opera. The plot so far, I believe, is that IPv6
allows long chains of extension headers which can cause processing problems
that have led some routers to disallow them altogether. Also, large headers in
fixed size fast path memory can keep routers from seeing application and port
numbers that some rules use. Hence this document proposes limits on header size
and ordering that we hope everyone can live with.

The motivation is clear enough, the limits are explained in an understandable
way, and as far as I can tell they are all reasonable.

I understand that the proposed status of this draft was recently changed from
BCP to Informational on the sensible basis that there isn't enough practice yet
to know what is best. Nonetheless it still contains RFC 2119 requirements
language, which seems overly prescriptive for a document that describes what is
so far a best guess. I think that all the upper case words can be turned into
lower case and still make sense, while not offering a premature promise that if
you do what they say, everyone will accept your traffic. We hope they do, but
that will presumably be revealed in Act Four.