Subject: Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-6man-oversized-header-chain-08: (with COMMENT)

From: "Benoit Claise" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 09:03:25 -0800

Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-6man-oversized-header-chain-08: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-oversized-header-chain/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I trust the responsible AD to handle my DISCUSS

1.
Please engage in the discussion for this one if you disagree.
Abstract

   In those scenarios in which the IPv6 header
   chain or options are unusually long and packets are fragmented, or
   scenarios in which the fragment size is very small, the first
   fragment of a packet may fail to include the entire IPv6 header
   chain. 

I was confused by or in "IPv6 header chain or options".
The options are the hop-by-hop and destination header options, right?
So these are part of the Extension Header, so the IPv6 Header Chain
already, no?
Proposal:
OLD:
         IPv6 header chain or options
NEW:
       IPv6 header chain (including options)

Same remark for

   This document updates the set of IPv6
   specifications to create an overall limit on the size of the
   combination of IPv6 options and IPv6 Extension Headers that is
   allowed in a single IPv6 packet. 

2.
OLD:

   This specification allows nodes that drop the aforementioned packets
   to signal such packet drops with ICMPv6 "Parameter Problem, IPv6
   first-fragment has incomplete IPv6 header chain" (Type 4, Code TBD)
   error messages.

NEW:
   This specification allows nodes or intermediate systems that drop the
aforementioned packets
   to signal such packet drops with ICMPv6 "Parameter Problem, IPv6
   first-fragment has incomplete IPv6 header chain" (Type 4, Code TBD)
   error messages.

3.
In section 4, it would nice to add: "not an issue for statefull
middleboxes"
For this comment, take it or leave it