IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] draft-jiang-idr-ts-flowspec-srv6-policy-07.txt - (8/17/2022 to 8/31/2022

Chenshuanglong <chenshuanglong@huawei.com> Fri, 26 August 2022 02:22 UTC

Return-Path: <chenshuanglong@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78859C159481 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Aug 2022 19:22:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.207
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.207 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Xyxo_bDtVcuL for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Aug 2022 19:22:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7FD44C1524D3 for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Aug 2022 19:22:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fraeml710-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.201]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4MDNrW3k6Bz688NM for <idr@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Aug 2022 10:22:03 +0800 (CST)
Received: from kwepemi500001.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.114) by fraeml710-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.59) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Fri, 26 Aug 2022 04:22:29 +0200
Received: from kwepemi500002.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.171) by kwepemi500001.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.114) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Fri, 26 Aug 2022 10:22:27 +0800
Received: from kwepemi500002.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.171]) by kwepemi500002.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.171]) with mapi id 15.01.2375.024; Fri, 26 Aug 2022 10:22:27 +0800
From: Chenshuanglong <chenshuanglong@huawei.com>
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: draft-jiang-idr-ts-flowspec-srv6-policy-07.txt - (8/17/2022 to 8/31/2022
Thread-Index: AdiySb9LAa1ZOpItTciSP4+WVLsPJAGpnzgQ
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 02:22:27 +0000
Message-ID: <5f085fb9602f4024857694099119ce5a@huawei.com>
References: <BYAPR08MB487272B6440945C76FACC0D8B36A9@BYAPR08MB4872.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <BYAPR08MB487272B6440945C76FACC0D8B36A9@BYAPR08MB4872.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.112.40.231]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_5f085fb9602f4024857694099119ce5ahuaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/ETB7zuWdCQopGQfcq2DfRffJAxY>
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-jiang-idr-ts-flowspec-srv6-policy-07.txt - (8/17/2022 to 8/31/2022
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 02:22:38 -0000

Hi Susan and WG,

I support the WG adoption of draft-jiang-idr-ts-flowspec-srv6-policy-07.

1)   Yes,   I agree
The introduction of the C-bit into the Traffic Action Extension Community makes sense.

2) Yes,  I agree
Document draft-jiang-idr-ts-flowspec-srv6-policy introduces a combination that reuses most existing implementations and is easy to deploy.
It is a useful addition to the draft -ietf-idr-flowspec-path-redirect.

3 Yes.   This work is very helpful for SRv6 network deployment.


Best Regards,
Shuanglong


From: Idr [mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Susan Hares
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 10:59 PM
To: idr@ietf.org
Subject: [Idr] draft-jiang-idr-ts-flowspec-srv6-policy-07.txt - (8/17/2022 to 8/31/2022

This begins a 2 week WG adoption call for draft-jiang-idr-ts-flowspec-srv6-policy-07.txt
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jiang-idr-ts-flowspec-srv6-policy/

During your discussion of this draft, please consider:

1) Do you agree with extending 8955 and 8956 to carry the
action bit [C] found for IPv4 and IPv6 found
draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-ip-02.txt

Figure 1 : Local Administrator

0                   1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|          Reserved           |C|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

C = 0 - redirect original flow
C = 1 - redirect copy of original flow

This bit augments the Redirect to IP action in RFC8955
And RFC8956.

2) Do you agree with this document use of this feature
in addition to  draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-path-redirect
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-path-redirect/

See the following thread for a discussion of this in March:
 https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/HENTMEoiMJGmcMuVz7LTYclCSdw/

3) Will this work help deployment of SRv6 networks?

We'll discuss this draft at the IDR interim on 8/29/2022.

Cheerily, Susan Hares

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email