From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 29 05:47:59 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1444716A41C for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 05:47:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from brdavis@odin.ac.hmc.edu) Received: from odin.ac.hmc.edu (Odin.AC.HMC.Edu [134.173.32.75]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB36143D48 for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 05:47:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from brdavis@odin.ac.hmc.edu) Received: from odin.ac.hmc.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by odin.ac.hmc.edu (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j5T5lwrA021321; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 22:47:58 -0700 Received: (from brdavis@localhost) by odin.ac.hmc.edu (8.13.0/8.13.0/Submit) id j5T5lw36021319; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 22:47:58 -0700 Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 22:47:58 -0700 From: Brooks Davis To: Srinivas Goud Message-ID: <20050629054758.GA20421@odin.ac.hmc.edu> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="9amGYk9869ThD9tj" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=8.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on odin.ac.hmc.edu Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: IPv6 Extension Headers X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 05:47:59 -0000 --9amGYk9869ThD9tj Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 11:10:50AM +0530, Srinivas Goud wrote: > Hello All,=20 > I am new bee to this group. =20 > I am working on IPv6 Extension headers. I am confused with freeBSD > implementation and RFC2460 specification for Destination options. >=20 > My interpretation from RFC2460 is that, If a packet consists of > hop-by-hop and destination extension headers, destination header > should be inserted inside AH. > i.e., hop + AH + dst. >=20 > But freeBSD implementation is the other way, > i.e., hop + dst + AH. >=20 > which is the correct way of implementation according to RFC2460? Please > let me know, if my interpretation is wrong. >=20 > Also, let me know AH insertion place in the following cases. > 1. hop + dst=20 > 2. hop + dst + route > 3. hop + dst + route + dst > 4. hop + dst + dst > 5. hop + dst + dst + route + route > 6. hop + dst + dst + route + route + dst + dst > 7. hop + dst + dst + route + dst + route + dst + dst >=20 > Any help/suggestion is greatly appreciated. The FreeBSD IPv6 implementation largly provided by the KAME project (www.kame.net), you might have better luck addressing your question to them. -- Brooks --=20 Any statement of the form "X is the one, true Y" is FALSE. PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529 9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4 --9amGYk9869ThD9tj Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCwjYNXY6L6fI4GtQRApXsAJ9wOOqakBVPWaWYqrsgm1jmxCl0agCg3FG2 5PGXHR+XFePhNjTZFbxRGJQ= =yplM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --9amGYk9869ThD9tj--