Re: [Detnet] IPv6 encapsulation in dataplane doc

Balázs Varga A <balazs.a.varga@ericsson.com> Mon, 12 February 2018 16:36 UTC

Return-Path: <balazs.a.varga@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: detnet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: detnet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30A9E126DD9 for <detnet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 08:36:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.321
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.321 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_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.com header.b=SYVPBnTm; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.com header.b=gwlioHH1
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 r5Zg67iOSu30 for <detnet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 08:36:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sesbmg23.ericsson.net (sesbmg23.ericsson.net [193.180.251.37]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7BFE112421A for <detnet@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 08:36:40 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=ericsson.com; s=mailgw201801; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@ericsson.com; t=1518453399; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:CC:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=ETG4x7w+xGmFCN3XQAyfBW4agxKLLlHWJuBHUtqXUMU=; b=SYVPBnTmqvT4IY0X3lM7czXurkafikn6c1WWoWlGQvB7EUP5LpefIKVdkWfkhrcH zZFg5R1+8ADPH/90/lhzH3YBqN7Ow3muq410LvGE7wafLz0rhJ21oRQ8qHsGy/b2 CpwdePyPIUXW3eCGpPI3xvbRVwDkktcTlZ/U1WelAWA=;
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-48bff7000000341b-5a-5a81c296d1be
Received: from ESESSHC002.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.183.24]) by sesbmg23.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 08.38.13339.692C18A5; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 17:36:39 +0100 (CET)
Received: from EUR03-DB5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (153.88.183.145) by oa.msg.ericsson.com (153.88.183.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.352.0; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 17:36:38 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=/1VKIPL4iHlPKrnabhgzbr4H9R8jj6cf5ydap2MdpBc=; b=gwlioHH1buWTbExbk368UdSTkddUS/lFDa+SgR9J5Uzv5n/SVCV1GyHk7EdXAmUqJPc7vAAkM0WiZp5qXr5sBbdazQcja6L4BA4ZEsjythaGYoozXHRwATrtKVNxzdJNcm/aeZtWosII+8dNwmNYVEG99xy0q0P1jDpqXHr/CpI=
Received: from VI1PR07MB1005.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.161.110.21) by VI1PR07MB1374.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.164.92.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P256) id 15.20.506.7; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 16:36:37 +0000
Received: from VI1PR07MB1005.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::f8bc:9e5b:947:26fd]) by VI1PR07MB1005.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::f8bc:9e5b:947:26fd%17]) with mapi id 15.20.0506.007; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 16:36:36 +0000
From: Balázs Varga A <balazs.a.varga@ericsson.com>
To: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>, Jouni <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
CC: "detnet@ietf.org" <detnet@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Detnet] IPv6 encapsulation in dataplane doc
Thread-Index: AdOgFyOl9vKMd7+3Skyj/a0jCzTraQADSTgAACYDgYAAQYLPAABsVu8AAALSj4AAAI9ZgAAayo8AAAu86TA=
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 16:36:36 +0000
Message-ID: <VI1PR07MB1005CDF8E6918345D861D312ACF70@VI1PR07MB1005.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
References: <cff50c52d2f945cfa8eff149f5242fb0@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com> <16170c78f30.27d3.9b4188e636579690ba6c69f2c8a0f1fd@labn.net> <22c101d3a0bc$5795b080$06c11180$@gmail.com> <b17a1c79-010d-b4a0-aa07-8182b72f2577@labn.net> <00A9AB24-830A-46C7-B3DB-5C17D2AC91EC@gmail.com> <b9c9fe85-fbd9-9859-51ca-27c9bda061a5@labn.net> <7CF3359D-204E-46E9-B7C6-B6134120502E@gmail.com> <d879c877a1a04760920c9c9c3edbe6e0@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <d879c877a1a04760920c9c9c3edbe6e0@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: hu-HU, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=balazs.a.varga@ericsson.com;
x-originating-ip: [78.131.21.94]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; VI1PR07MB1374; 7:ALuv8yeLiv46qOUUASYMs6/Ev8VOTIqyHLqj4UHew2y2XlZ59Kjl32vWVFt1lnEZNZ+ZjeSGEacZJwO56LzhX8GmyjUEkiwZc7aU2Dv2d3HYzXmkU7WwrUYyyck6UYLHtRouXtil8kb0I46WAC5wDpenYYOc2qT8u0uElBmjlLMCSyGifVQGByylhejYOSkClEjosSG4jK8X64+jfrdpwm/Z4CgNUzPSu9M9hKq35yL/U2RIwWaWRAV1OPkxN5uw
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SSOS;
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: c3de9b3e-8342-44df-532e-08d57236c901
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652020)(5600026)(4604075)(3008032)(4534165)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(2017052603307)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:VI1PR07MB1374;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: VI1PR07MB1374:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <VI1PR07MB137447CE3CACF085AA1A164BACF70@VI1PR07MB1374.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(85827821059158)(95692535739014);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040501)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001)(3231101)(944501161)(93006095)(93001095)(10201501046)(6041288)(20161123558120)(20161123562045)(20161123560045)(20161123564045)(201703131423095)(201702281528075)(20161123555045)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(6072148)(201708071742011); SRVR:VI1PR07MB1374; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:VI1PR07MB1374;
x-forefront-prvs: 0581B5AB35
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(39380400002)(346002)(39860400002)(376002)(366004)(396003)(189003)(199004)(13464003)(86362001)(305945005)(6436002)(2906002)(7736002)(6306002)(9686003)(5890100001)(14454004)(3280700002)(68736007)(5250100002)(26005)(53946003)(110136005)(5660300001)(316002)(6116002)(3846002)(186003)(39060400002)(2950100002)(105586002)(102836004)(4326008)(53936002)(93886005)(7696005)(478600001)(74316002)(2900100001)(6246003)(53546011)(97736004)(8936002)(33656002)(59450400001)(55016002)(3660700001)(66066001)(25786009)(81166006)(81156014)(8676002)(229853002)(76176011)(561944003)(6506007)(966005)(99286004)(106356001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:VI1PR07MB1374; H:VI1PR07MB1005.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: ericsson.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: M3ZwIZEEjW+Jb2xSsE00buMqadN5QbFffcsi4c9XZ8ztxs55OcfI1qht0+ZJ0mPHDktkcUtY0SYKK0lsX0A+pA==
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: c3de9b3e-8342-44df-532e-08d57236c901
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 12 Feb 2018 16:36:36.7025 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: VI1PR07MB1374
X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA02SbUhTYRTHee69W1dx8bQ0D6ZoA4ssp72QK8uyqFYkmB/EpLItLyrqtDu1 DATHSJZ90Gip8wXNRkE4S3GpoFgzSUmx0sCXUtcsXW4i2os2iXa9Bn37nf/5c/7nPDw0KS4X +NFpqhyGVSkyJEJPypDQCqHlFk1i+KrBS+ZarKJkXY2FhEyndVKyCv08OkbJ9a4mgby98tMG udG4QsgXmrXCWCrR83Ayk5GWx7BhUVc8U4e1QdmOghtvG16QhehVXDHyoAHvB535A1mMPGkx 7kbwecVA8UUvgtcTX4RcQeFFAkxlz4R8p4yAcd2UgC+sCLSGEsQNE+KTsKSzul007Y1zoX9e zMkk3gGjdSaS4834IHQOtBIce+NDMG77RvKshCLz2JpO4WBodNaQ3BgRvggG63U+6jkJ/VNP 1/we7qiq/p4NnAfhALCaZHyUL4xN1xL8aRiMHYMkzz5gt/0RcIzwZXB1Fa7rQfCwy4x4DoD3 tXcQlwW4hYDqIsf6ICmY7zrXTTEwY6sieJP7iW4vt68tATgEND1JvCcdyseNAp7PQv3HeQHv LyHB3l+/nuwPE99voVIUVvnf4jxLYeS+XsjzLnj0YI7kWIQ3QZ9hmqpD1BPko2bUysyUvfuk DJt2Va3OUklVTE4zcn+Xly2u4DY05Ii2IEwjiZdI3qJJFAsUeer8TAsCmpR4i1a1bkmUrMi/ ybBZSWxuBqO2oK00JfEV9Z0RJYpxiiKHSWeYbIb91yVoD79CtH2hRUfP6kcUk7mjEXFhzhhp mY0uUP4MHwzNNXWftyeLh9vk9l+PA4+UzcV/DXRAQgU7MHQ6PoJc+XFAX+MQ7pwcO3GN3RI1 EjlTVF9Z3bRt2hhxfDbaKMaR0kunNP5KU+liU4M1tnH5d+fShY6NvebqN+fexey+d9RLax+M lVDqVMWeEJJVK/4Cc3Fz5yoDAAA=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/tCMxsupHvMgXL9Q3M45PUiwZRDY>
Subject: Re: [Detnet] IPv6 encapsulation in dataplane doc
X-BeenThere: detnet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions on Deterministic Networking BoF and Proposed WG <detnet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/detnet>, <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/detnet/>
List-Post: <mailto:detnet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet>, <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 16:36:45 -0000

Hi Pascal,

I have a lot of sympathy on your view.
- OK: "DetNet would provide its own sequencing based on reception order at ingress edge."
- OK: "ingress edge may be a NIC card"
- OK: "avoid DPI"

However I have some questions for clarification on your final conclusions:
- Why no seq.num in IP? That would mean no PREF, no IOD function within the DetNet domain
Which is an IP PSN.
- What would be the gain from a "L4 transport designed to provide PREF, IOD, FEC, ... "?
I mean that would be a duplicate, as in the DetNet network You would have the same function.
Checking L4 within the DetNet domain would require DPI, what I guess we do not want.
- I am also somewhat confused by your WiFi example. I mean in TSN/DetNet scenarios 
end-systems are always assumed to be in sync with their controller(s). So I do not agree with
this statement: "Existing industrial devices can claim a rough need for a given rate but were 
not necessarily designed to provide guarantees for burstiness in DetNet terms." 

Thanks & Cheers
Bala'zs

-----Original Message-----
From: detnet [mailto:detnet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
Sent: 2018. február 12. 11:30
To: Jouni <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>; Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Cc: detnet@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Detnet] IPv6 encapsulation in dataplane doc

Hello Jouni and Lou:

Just to make sure we are on the same line:

- IPvX (==v4/v6) would signal the flow implicitly - derived from the tuples- but not the source sequencing. No need to change IP.

- DetNet may provide PREF/IOD from the edge ingress. DetNet would provide its own sequencing based on reception order at ingress edge.

- The  ingress edge may be a NIC card in the originating node. It would be operating below IPvX and possibly equipped with 2 Ethernet ports and capable of PREF.

- Anything above IP is beyond charter. A upper layer sequence may be visible in the L4-transport or at the application layer but DetNet will not look for it. A snooping edge device doing DPI may dig in the packet and find information for packet identification and ordering, for a particular application, and that is beyond the interests of the WG.

- A L4 transport may be designed to provide PREF, IOD, FEC (network coding) and whatever else needed. This would be done in TSV Area with DetNet's blessing.

Do we agree?

Pascal

-----Original Message-----
From: Jouni [mailto:jouni.nospam@gmail.com] 
Sent: dimanche 11 février 2018 22:43
To: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Cc: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com>; detnet@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Detnet] IPv6 encapsulation in dataplane doc



>>>> * End systems cannot participate to DetNet service layer packet 
>>>> elimination & duplication business. If they still do e.g. using 
>>>> DetNet DstOpt that is separate from subnet/transport layer provided service.
>>> 
>>> True, end station participation in PREF wouldn't be possible in this 
>>> simplified approach for IP, but the end stations *could* still 
>>> participate in the equivalent function provided by a sub-net layer 
>>> such as TSN. So end to end detnet traffic protection is not 
>>> possible, but it doesn't mean it can't be provided by lower network 
>>> layers.  The gain here is a simplified and unified IP solution and 
>>> simplified host processing/support, albeit with a loss of one of the 
>>> three end to end detnet service attributes.
>> 
>> Yes, that's true (as I already clarified in my latest mail to Pascal).
>> 
> 
> yes.  It's good for all to remember that DetNet is just as much (if 
> not
> more) about supporting explicit routes with congestion protection and 
> latency control....

Indeed..

>>>> * Different subnet/transport layer segments in the DetNet domain 
>>>> are likely to use their own sequencing and duplication & 
>>>> elimination solutions. I am not sure how independent those will be 
>>>> e.g., is the sequence numbering unified across or only per segment. 
>>>> The former is not IMO easy and the latter easily reduces to single 
>>>> points between segments to handle number book keeping properly.
>>> 
>>> Agreed.  The question for the WG is this a reasonable compromise in 
>>> order to in our *initial* solution defined by the WG.  -- Nothing 
>>> says we can't come back and improve on this in the future, but it 
>>> will allow us to get *something* useful defined with less complexity.
>> 
>> I would first specify the required steps that make IP as-is work within one subnet/transport layer segment. That should be an achievable goal with a limitation of e.g. a single interconnection point between subnet/transport layer segments of different types/solutions. 
>> 
> 
> sure. as long as one of the 'attached stations' can be a router.

Yes. That's the plan at least from my side.

- Juoni


> 
>> After that look into solving multiple interconnection points.. and there the L4 path that Pascal mentioned or that IPv6 DetNet DstOpt of mine could be way forward.
>> 
> 
> yes, this would be good follow on work...
> 
> Cheers,
> Lou
>> - Jouni
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Regardless the above I am keen to explore this alternative approach..
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Great - look forward to hear the results!
>>> Lou
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -          Jouni
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> *From:* detnet [mailto:detnet-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Lou 
>>>> Berger
>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 7, 2018 17:00 PM
>>>> *To:* Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com>; 
>>>> detnet@ietf.org
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Detnet] IPv6 encapsulation in dataplane doc
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Pascal/all,
>>>> 
>>>> At the last interim a proposal was made to simplify IP processing, 
>>>> at least for the initial detnet solution, by leaving PREF to the 
>>>> subnet/transport layers (i.e., TSN and MPLS) and providing DetNet 
>>>> flow identification based on typical IP 5-tuple perhaps + dscp. 
>>>> This approach has several benefits beyond simplification, notably 
>>>> it will work for both ipv4 and IPv6, and doesn't require any 
>>>> modification to encapsulation / formats.
>>>> 
>>>> It would be really valuable to get feedback from the whole working 
>>>> group if this simplification is acceptable or has unacceptable limitations.
>>>> 
>>>> Lou
>>>> 
>>>> On February 7, 2018 8:28:02 AM "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)"
>>>> <pthubert@cisco.com <mailto:pthubert@cisco.com>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>   Dear all
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>   This is about the IPv6 encapsulation and more precisely
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>                           Therefore, if a DetNet-aware end system 
>>>> only
>>>> 
>>>>      inserted the DetNet Destination Option into the IPv6 but e.g., 
>>>> a
>>>> 
>>>>      DetNet Edge node is configured to enforce an explicit route 
>>>> for the
>>>> 
>>>>      IPv6 packet using a source routing header, then it has no 
>>>> other
>>>> 
>>>>      possibility than add an outer tunneling IPv6 header with 
>>>> required
>>>> 
>>>>      extension headers in it.  The processing of IPv6 packets in a 
>>>> DetNet
>>>> 
>>>>      Edge node is discussed further in Section 6.4.1
>>>>   <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-detnet-dp-sol-01#section-6.4.1>.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>   With the current spec, a source sends a DetNet packet as
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>                       +---------------------------------+
>>>> 
>>>>                       |                                 |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |           DetNet Flow           |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |             Payload             |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |                                 |
>>>> 
>>>>                       /---------------------------------\
>>>> 
>>>>                       H   Optional DetNet DstOpt Hdr    H
>>>> 
>>>>                       \---------------------------------/
>>>> 
>>>>                       |          IPv6 header            |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |     (with set Flow label)       |
>>>> 
>>>>                       +---------------------------------+
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>   And then the ingress node needs to re-encapsulate as
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>                       +---------------------------------+
>>>> 
>>>>                       |                                 |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |           DetNet Flow           |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |             Payload             |
>>>> 
>>>>                      |                                 |
>>>> 
>>>>                       /---------------------------------\
>>>> 
>>>>                       H        DetNet DstOpt Hdr        H
>>>> 
>>>>                       \---------------------------------/
>>>> 
>>>>                       |          IPv6 header            |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |     (with set Flow label)       |
>>>> 
>>>>                       +=================================+
>>>> 
>>>>                       |          Routing header         |
>>>> 
>>>>                       /---------------------------------\
>>>> 
>>>>                       H        DetNet DstOpt Hdr        H
>>>> 
>>>>                       \---------------------------------/
>>>> 
>>>>                       |          IPv6 header            |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |     (with set Flow label)       |
>>>> 
>>>>                       +---------------------------------+
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>   This creates a duplication of the DetNet Destination Option.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>   There are alternatives
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>   a)  whereby the packet is tunneled from the source to the detnet
>>>>   ingress, and based on its state the DetNet ingress accepts the
>>>>   packet, processes it and then resends it. The tunneled version of
>>>>   this could be:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>                       +---------------------------------+
>>>> 
>>>>                       |                                 |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |           DetNet Flow           |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |             Payload             |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |                                 |
>>>> 
>>>>                       +---------------------------------+
>>>> 
>>>>                       |          IPv6 header            |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |   (dest = final destination)    |
>>>> 
>>>>                       /=================================\
>>>> 
>>>>                       H   Optional DetNet DstOpt Hdr    H
>>>> 
>>>>                       \---------------------------------/
>>>> 
>>>>                       |          IPv6 header            |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |   (dest = DetNet ingress edge)  |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |     (with set Flow label)       |
>>>> 
>>>>                       +---------------------------------+
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>   Which allows the ingress to tunnel to the egress as follows:
>>>> 
>>>>                       +---------------------------------+
>>>> 
>>>>                       |                                 |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |           DetNet Flow           |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |             Payload             |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |                                 |
>>>> 
>>>>                       +---------------------------------+
>>>> 
>>>>                       |          IPv6 header            |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |      (to final destination)     |
>>>> 
>>>>                       +=================================+
>>>> 
>>>>                       |          Routing header         |
>>>> 
>>>>                       /---------------------------------\
>>>> 
>>>>                       H   Optional DetNet DstOpt Hdr    H
>>>> 
>>>>                       \---------------------------------/
>>>> 
>>>>                       |          IPv6 header            |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |   (dest = DetNet egress edge)   |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |     (with set Flow label)       |
>>>> 
>>>>                       +---------------------------------+
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>   b)  whereby the PREF is done by the end nodes and the tunnel is
>>>>   transport only, meaning that there are 2 tunnels A and B and that
>>>>   the source sends twice a packet like this:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>                       +---------------------------------+
>>>> 
>>>>                       |                                 |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |           DetNet Flow           |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |             Payload             |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |                                 |
>>>> 
>>>>                       /---------------------------------\
>>>> 
>>>>                       H   Optional DetNet DstOpt Hdr    H
>>>> 
>>>>                       \---------------------------------/
>>>> 
>>>>                       |          IPv6 header            |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |   (dest = DetNet ingress edge X)|
>>>> 
>>>>                       |     (with set Flow label)       |
>>>> 
>>>>                       +---------------------------------+
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>   And then the ingress node needs to re-encapsulate as
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>                       +---------------------------------+
>>>> 
>>>>                       |                                 |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |           DetNet Flow           |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |             Payload             |
>>>> 
>>>>                      |                                 |
>>>> 
>>>>                       /---------------------------------\
>>>> 
>>>>                       H        DetNet DstOpt Hdr        H
>>>> 
>>>>                       \---------------------------------/
>>>> 
>>>>                       |          IPv6 header            |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |   (dest = final destination)    |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |     (with set Flow label)       |
>>>> 
>>>>                       +=================================+
>>>> 
>>>>                       |          Routing header         |
>>>> 
>>>>                       +---------------------------------+
>>>> 
>>>>                       |          IPv6 header            |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |   (dest = DetNet egress edge X) |
>>>> 
>>>>                       |     (with set Flow label)       |
>>>> 
>>>>                       +---------------------------------+
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>   Cheers,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>   Pascal
>>>> 
>>>>   _______________________________________________
>>>>   detnet mailing list
>>>>   detnet@ietf.org <mailto:detnet%40ietf.org>
>>>>   https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

_______________________________________________
detnet mailing list
detnet@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet