Re: [bess] 答复: SRv6 versus SR-MPLS
Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Sat, 05 October 2019 11:23 UTC
Return-Path: <robert@raszuk.net>
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EB2112012D for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 5 Oct 2019 04:23:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=raszuk.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IpBTH1EJO1lE for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 5 Oct 2019 04:23:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt1-x82e.google.com (mail-qt1-x82e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E7381200D5 for <bess@ietf.org>; Sat, 5 Oct 2019 04:23:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt1-x82e.google.com with SMTP id c21so12363350qtj.12 for <bess@ietf.org>; Sat, 05 Oct 2019 04:23:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=raszuk.net; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=L1aZKy9Q+WcOz4M4gNZLfL91V5snjPp+V7yPpdvE63g=; b=E06PR5SN0AjmIPBniw40eMTRPZ7h/p8gNv2eU55RAJVOH8XKvMaoRC29UNeiivWE0P xGtY7CML7YI8HgKCT96s5B/ky4i+ciRYQlFi6vrp3Mlrdu+grHrEJGbgpQqKRYuF5cFq FF/rZm3tB34adqjmBaz429eLFq21dJrZQJFJc1EQY2FshYB6v+N9yd2QwxZEtsjiRH6/ ZGwcQwZFYmTGFuAzEjvz/bwBDDr7ItQHvHn9In0zQNq5uGyXCvb+6qMF1/UkVlmvf8jP bz87Y0TD3QO3oGCHpAWdNVojepzUZlFzCbUZIdIJ+ovmz53dIhhuAWR9DkICPD6sMr8r t/tA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=L1aZKy9Q+WcOz4M4gNZLfL91V5snjPp+V7yPpdvE63g=; b=pAU9/j9MqkXTHby0MYnZTagWBbgJxTytsJtg0jofwohS96e7k7fj/n0wENmpUKl670 f+rH/qwKs/3MsuJ6CaJTraoeCht+SLG92bRQ3huQVYflLJvfxRfkTwDMNLTWBqd+iuhk Jjlx7+m+paiodGXoqzN9iQuux311OT6p5Zu86/K89DOW3LT9FCuCt/SdEJpQcXYrSkQp wH2OM2d6glFduRMzFeZeWk4m9widZwBCz1HrX4j0e5joHX0dUCggSfH9dAk9DIdX0lJi +nO8jx2cQPHTtlOJmxzo9wQk7s0yp+eiy5zhrgKrsq7t9rg+NIkQeaD8GgRKQN5CsaAu 9Ymw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUKAT96+SH5KH5Y1InlTlSf0wGsmjezEi8M5dJRwslyLz7RSA0U S+w/NyrOwmT+9YvIE5+Guczk69Pe+AEm+oL2x5mHQA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyJ84Nfpp065azapePkdKOMCvmRU/dabpgpfeo1PwU6bYu1M4wS6CMKA5Yi50jYShpMIbtyx9vqo2dp+K6EfGw=
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5494:: with SMTP id q20mr18755391qvy.8.1570274594556; Sat, 05 Oct 2019 04:23:14 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <8D0ACADB-2F74-4F66-8E67-79E63E1A8FF1@gmail.com> <5A5B4DE12C0DAC44AF501CD9A2B01A8D934E764D@DGGEMM532-MBX.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <5A5B4DE12C0DAC44AF501CD9A2B01A8D934E764D@DGGEMM532-MBX.china.huawei.com>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2019 13:23:05 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOj+MMGn-d1pEWxpT7GCA9D29F3tLKdUATc1rOHzhhLV=XyMkA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lizhenbin <lizhenbin@huawei.com>
Cc: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>, "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000068a54f0594280b99"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/53waaYv4OPqeTeDkdw1Sf06dwyU>
Subject: Re: [bess] 答复: SRv6 versus SR-MPLS
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list <bess.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bess>, <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bess/>
List-Post: <mailto:bess@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess>, <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2019 11:23:19 -0000
IMHO the question of SR-MPLS vs SRv6 is wrong as it all depends what are you trying to accomplish in your network and what services you need to run on it. For example some networks need TE some do not. Some may like to carry L2/L3VPNs some do not. Some may think about requirements associated with special packet handling perhaps augmented with in house development of P4 based fancy services so do not. Last some network are IPv4 only, some are IPv4+MPLS, some may be dual stack and some may be IPv6 only. For some the overhead associated with attaching additional data to each packet matters - so do not care and do not even realize it :). So this is very loaded question. It is like asking should I go left or should I go right without stating your ultimate destination. Sure likely you may end up there regardless how you turn but it may not be optimal path. And last as this is BESS WG ... I would really seriously consider for BESS services use of RFC4797 and RFC7510. Cheers, R. On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 11:35 AM Lizhenbin <lizhenbin@huawei.com> wrote: > Hi Gyna, > > We proposed following the draft which has relation with your question. > Hope it may be helpful. > > > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xie-spring-srv6-network-migration-00 > > > > From my point of view, one of the best advantages of SRv6 is easy > incremental deployment. > > I believe there will more deployments of SRv6 soon. > > > > > > Best Regards, > > Zhenbin (Robin) > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > *发件人:* BESS [bess-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Gyan Mishra [hayabusagsm@gmail.com] > *发送时间:* 2019年10月5日 8:22 > *收件人:* bess@ietf.org > *主题:* [bess] SRv6 versus SR-MPLS > > > Bess, > > What is the benefit of SRv6 over SR-MPLS for greenfield deployments or > existing mpls deployments. > > Regards, > > Gyan Mishra > > IT Network Engineering & Technology > > Verizon Communications Inc. (VZ) > > 13101 Columbia Pike > <https://www.google.com/maps/search/13101+Columbia+Pike?entry=gmail&source=g> FDC1 > 3rd Floor > > <https://imailcn01.huawei.com/owa/UrlBlockedError.aspx>Silver Spring, MD > 20904 <https://imailcn01.huawei.com/owa/UrlBlockedError.aspx> > > United States <https://imailcn01.huawei.com/owa/UrlBlockedError.aspx> > > Phone: 301 502-1347 > > Email: gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com > > www.linkedin.com/in/GYAN-MISHRA-RS-SP-MPLS-IPV6-EXPERT > > Sent from my iPhone > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > BESS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess >
- [bess] SRv6 versus SR-MPLS Gyan Mishra
- Re: [bess] SRv6 versus SR-MPLS Gyan Mishra
- [bess] 答复: SRv6 versus SR-MPLS Lizhenbin
- Re: [bess] 答复: SRv6 versus SR-MPLS Robert Raszuk
- Re: [bess] 答复: SRv6 versus SR-MPLS Krzysztof Szarkowicz
- Re: [bess] SRv6 versus SR-MPLS Greg Mirsky
- Re: [bess] 答复: SRv6 versus SR-MPLS Jeff Tantsura
- Re: [bess] SRv6 versus SR-MPLS Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [bess] SRv6 versus SR-MPLS Krzysztof Szarkowicz
- Re: [bess] SRv6 versus SR-MPLS Greg Mirsky
- Re: [bess] SRv6 versus SR-MPLS Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [bess] SRv6 versus SR-MPLS Gyan Mishra
- Re: [bess] SRv6 versus SR-MPLS Stewart Bryant
- Re: [bess] SRv6 versus SR-MPLS Gyan Mishra