2

RFC2460 doesn't describe any types other than Type 0. And in RFC5095, it deprecated Type 0 Routing Header. Does that mean Routing Header is useless?

2

Basically, at this point in time, yes. The door is still open for future types, but I think the whole idea of the routing header was flawed to begin with. Add the fact that some variants of SDN want to do something similar, and I think the idea is dead.

I have never thought it a good idea to let end-devices try to dictate the path packets take through the network. Similarly, if you look at QoS, most successful QoS implementations usually overwrite the end-device supplied DSCP value in order to create a comprehensive, consistent QoS solution; everybody wants their traffic marked EF.

| improve this answer | |
  • Yes, it the IPv6 version of "source route", which was a defunct (no one allowed it) option when v6 was designed. (yet more head-in-the-sand) – Ricky Beam Dec 14 '15 at 6:16
  • There are still valid uses, but they aren't very common. Mobile IPv6 for example. The official list is here: iana.org/assignments/ipv6-parameters/… – Sander Steffann Dec 14 '15 at 7:08

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.