Re: [v6ops] [EXTERNAL] Re: [IPv6] Why folks are blocking IPv6 extension headers? (Episode 1000 and counting) (Linux DoS)
Warren Kumari <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.opsec,gmane.ietf.v6ops,gmane.ietf.ipv6 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAHw9_iKhNSRX1DmUN_uXEPA95Ue9ofpbgOkxxKTtk6_k5XPXLw@mail.gmail.com> |
On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 11:13 AM, Ole Troan <[email protected]> wrote: > A well-implemented host will not be troubled by unkown extension headers > or options. > > Indeed. However, not all hosts are well-implemented. > > "Not be troubled by” == “drop”? > I had assumed "not troubled by" meant "doesn't explode, killing everyone inside". I'd assume that no-one is thinking that a host or application should try and process an extension header that it doesn't understand… but then again, I'm often wrong in my assuimptions. W > I don’t agree that a well-implemented host and application should blindly > accept any and all extension headers. If my application cannot use those > extension headers why do you send them to me? If they are purely for the > use in the network, then again why do you expose them to the application? > > If you can give some practical examples where it’s beneficial to “process” > unknown extension headers by hosts/applications, then this may be a little > easier to reason over. > > O. >