[Detnet-dp-dt] IPv6 and multicast
Jouni Korhonen <jouni.korhonen@broadcom.com> Wed, 24 May 2017 21:55 UTC
Return-Path: <jouni.korhonen@broadcom.com>
X-Original-To: detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64373129B9C
for <detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 May 2017 14:55:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
header.d=broadcom.com
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 R89JvquZ1wA0 for <detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Wed, 24 May 2017 14:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x233.google.com (mail-qt0-x233.google.com
[IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::233])
(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 0F672129494
for <Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 May 2017 14:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x233.google.com with SMTP id v27so167009973qtg.2
for <Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 May 2017 14:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=broadcom.com; s=google;
h=from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:message-id:date
:to; bh=v9xgnhjIoA5tfs9eYd9QVCdQ47I6+20NI9bVbUcoTuM=;
b=Sbh+g7FwarHElT+4s4s4aPsAGRQkGakHkjFxZcfYF6RtbUYnPbpjWjQL0CkcxsyGHZ
7+SdUe8tBOBbZCD8jDa28CACAbQ8ZasakQC/W8YLpGeyyxZ2O+dsNzcdPE0pKdYckw1u
6DiEQI655sRMSTuNaOZju+261/BgK7Rj5qiso=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version
:subject:message-id:date:to;
bh=v9xgnhjIoA5tfs9eYd9QVCdQ47I6+20NI9bVbUcoTuM=;
b=iECe54G5UvskqXcEYSf0D0IxlUDAlLcTHscK+H8DvjntVcy3g5fFQqDDQ4Af8MGAOY
+iUIwmWCcmHKahgvRYufzKTY4JOszPmZuOWfhG8Gz1Dau60KfrWAWVp7HeTLtAzyxAje
qFoexV3LWHhERux72/0D+Lnxf8es66mVTWm82EAOiz1+dREE1anBOsBXVwChcUyjrJBe
zkfbENpk0VupDNI+89ycOFx7rbvcH/VR3+brw1JlVLZNrnfchRFF1IXhjcvIZMweRxpW
THqCUdgUHoNde3vrK0WzCii3bQrfg7YyP4+bDHxEqzNvfxUtmHVs7XqxdFkp2JObvRvU
6Kcw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcCDu0FJieO4toOK2JRjziQ0WsnGPXbDeBW6lnXwHHSfvyxTNpHU
Kw4amkz5DXaSa4Vy0yfWOg==
X-Received: by 10.200.35.230 with SMTP id r35mr36461002qtr.167.1495662902739;
Wed, 24 May 2017 14:55:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.89.94] ([216.31.219.19])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z53sm3460770qth.43.2017.05.24.14.55.01
for <Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Wed, 24 May 2017 14:55:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jouni Korhonen <jouni.korhonen@broadcom.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Message-Id: <7A8644F8-9A31-44FC-8561-C3D2B48FB356@broadcom.com>
Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 14:55:00 -0700
To: Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet-dp-dt/uFzYjBtilaKdfBMmqKZIjujUMLM>
Subject: [Detnet-dp-dt] IPv6 and multicast
X-BeenThere: detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: DetNet WG Data Plane Design Team <detnet-dp-dt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/detnet-dp-dt>,
<mailto:detnet-dp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/detnet-dp-dt/>
List-Post: <mailto:detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:detnet-dp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet-dp-dt>,
<mailto:detnet-dp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 21:55:05 -0000
Continuing the discussion we had about IPv6, multicast and destination options. In a multicast case only the final receivers of the packets (i.e. the nodes joining to the multicast group as end hosts) would examine the Destination Option. I am not sure if this is the desired behavior? On the other hand a Hop by Hop option would be examined by all intermediate nodes whether they are PREF processing or not. Whcih one you would think is a better approach? When using unicast and things like segment routing the behavior of the nodes is more straight forward. The processing of the Destination Option is done each time one of the routing option destinations are reached. - Jouni -- Jouni Korhonen, Broadcom, Core Switching Group +1-408-391-7160
- [Detnet-dp-dt] IPv6 and multicast Jouni Korhonen
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] IPv6 and multicast Balázs Varga A
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] IPv6 and multicast Jouni Korhonen