Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Popping
Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> Sat, 07 December 2019 16:26 UTC
Return-Path: <tom@herbertland.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C3311207FF for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Dec 2019 08:26:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 uDpmxFTSL5Uo for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Dec 2019 08:26:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ed1-x52c.google.com (mail-ed1-x52c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52c]) (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 10F5F1200C5 for <6man@ietf.org>; Sat, 7 Dec 2019 08:26:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ed1-x52c.google.com with SMTP id v16so8625312edy.6 for <6man@ietf.org>; Sat, 07 Dec 2019 08:26:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=mibFHzrwe3OxuuURRUrp9AkQ6XcDENjJhr0bYyh82ho=; b=qFWIKmdRMmcnAXUP88djYt2W5Ox9UJ+QgYvFtMUnayFdhf9dIHusHmg9reDv1yaXBj fQcONfWE3bruP7o/daOysrfOUnbt8tJYLPDULkFRhSM8/b3a5qui0GS+NU4vtzvj1bAu YEwiU+BCsB/xozfFrPw77/6e12DiYgufasY17rjWELaqcs7FBFvTZ6aLHLbO+NynqZXi WICG582gOD57rSn3/XqcehbbFV0G+iCAMtcOjqqqaXunKpyE3DlK5gNNqNUAJnYOdF0j oFCfVEz2bPaet40chYjj4fSiPz3MDDta3PirZGTCXTeHfcI02lm9gERbRftpPPruy+jR 3swQ==
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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=mibFHzrwe3OxuuURRUrp9AkQ6XcDENjJhr0bYyh82ho=; b=r8C9VCdA3sU01kBeI1XoF6IwOdvli3wMH29llU5Ui/jnZ2LrpxzZ9DeJUXJa3neFiS 0BX2UA2+Ix4+nq+aF+E6qpl9uKWdgym5VRqfLZNOZhOO7dSA3orhKALMf4UGzw3/HObD bm6rGxAg+u02xc3rqXlMwhuC1FrCkEz2PASv9HLknj48iDB5D6lXJl6M/1nBv7f630QU Jx9Tf1LaMC1GmzOv2cED/TDAxaTQmBpXEsP6CxCDDQNP8t0DCuToedfoOcK+brDoPzMy sjsBV/Zj6nqVfQQphD08ktc0kbSE6LJs3i0RaxOaRIe7qozfhqIkmsxisXSE+h07QbBE 09Zw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW8XVnXE80OvtoplqMj27cWp/Fxs0BL22erK2wD0ppJ3qYzx+X4 sMLvtfSIn1UPxs8sxwmp9Qs4JNGF3X3y+POljc5EOw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqweMnUxVEPbaJ10PFlLm6axA4OGDwcazM3CBZomwMOeoZAamF4fP+aWRl/oSxDwZm0SoX/jEFvu2xcA9fxpwAs=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:a444:: with SMTP id cb4mr22258376ejb.42.1575736000415; Sat, 07 Dec 2019 08:26:40 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <BN7PR05MB56998A05469327E759B5B671AE5D0@BN7PR05MB5699.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <3AD3BD11-8C34-41FE-B88F-49A9F2561D78@cisco.com> <BN7PR05MB569946D6AA5C6B78AFC05F6BAE5C0@BN7PR05MB5699.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <D6B1AED6-0AB2-4394-9503-7A1885BC8B40@cisco.com> <BN7PR05MB5699C73EF0EE1F8E7A96C738AE5F0@BN7PR05MB5699.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <7B7CFEB8-80F0-4690-9BE3-8D5F935E148A@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <7B7CFEB8-80F0-4690-9BE3-8D5F935E148A@cisco.com>
From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2019 08:26:29 -0800
Message-ID: <CALx6S375sPG3jNybNbyA5eAUKTefGy_=LKBcmhfEhc5-B4e1OQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Popping
To: "Darren Dukes (ddukes)" <ddukes@cisco.com>
Cc: Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>, SPRING WG <spring@ietf.org>, 6man <6man@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/9fOD5CAA6utAQ-Ke46dF_hY9Ouo>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2019 16:26:44 -0000
On Sat, Dec 7, 2019 at 7:10 AM Darren Dukes (ddukes) <ddukes@cisco.com> wrote: > > Ron, you say > >> RFC 8200 addresses extension header insertion and deletion identically, in the same sentence. > > This sentence you refer to clearly permits PSP as defined in network programming: > Extension headers (except for the Hop-by-Hop Options header) are not > processed, inserted, or deleted by any node along a packet's delivery > path, until the packet reaches the node (or each of the set of nodes, > in the case of multicast) identified in the Destination Address field > of the IPv6 header. > > Clearly we process the SRH at the node identified in the destination address field of the IPv6 header. > With PSP we remove the SRH at the node identified in the destination address field of the IPv6 header. > Darren, I believe you are assuming a very liberal interpretation of the wording in RFC8200. If intermediate hosts in the routing list are able to add or remove SRH per RFC8200, then they are allowed to add or remove any and all extension headers per the same interpretation. I do not believe that is at all the intent of RFC8200. Also note that the liberal interpretation it would validate other cases of arbitrary extension header manipulation like in NAT devices for instance. Tom > I think it’s clear we can conclude this thread. > > Darren > > > > On Dec 6, 2019, at 5:01 PM, Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net> wrote: > > >> I have observed, in your original post, the conflation of SRH insertion within an SR Domain with the PSP behavior defined in network programming. > >> Whether this was intentional or not, I do not know. > >> Regardless, it is wrong. > > Darren, > > We clearly disagree. RFC 8200 addresses extension header insertion and deletion identically, in the same sentence. > > > Ron > > > > > > > Juniper Business Use Only > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > ipv6@ietf.org > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > --------------------------------------------------------------------
- Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Popping Ron Bonica
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Fernando Gont
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- RE: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Ron Bonica
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Fernando Gont
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… otroan
- RE: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Ron Bonica
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… otroan
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Fernando Gont
- We don't seem to be following our processes (Re: … Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… otroan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… otroan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Tom Herbert
- RE: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Ron Bonica
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Enno Rey
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Enno Rey
- RE: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Ron Bonica
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Bob Hinden
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… otroan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Sander Steffann
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Tom Herbert
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Sander Steffann
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Robert Raszuk
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Bob Hinden
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… otroan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Tom Herbert
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… otroan
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Andrew Alston
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… otroan
- RE: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Andrew Alston
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… otroan
- RE: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Ron Bonica
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Fernando Gont
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- RE: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Ole Troan
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Andrew Alston
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Sander Steffann
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Tom Herbert
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… otroan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… otroan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Tom Herbert
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Ole Troan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Fernando Gont
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Separating issues (was Re: [spring] We don't seem… Suresh Krishnan
- RE: Separating issues (was Re: [spring] We don't … Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… otroan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Mark Smith
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… otroan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… otroan
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Fernando Gont
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Fernando Gont
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Robert Raszuk
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Tom Herbert
- Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Pop… Tom Herbert
- Re: [spring] Network Programming - Penultimate Se… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Fernando Gont
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Fernando Gont
- Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Mark Smith
- IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Fernando Gont
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Sander Steffann
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Gyan Mishra
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Joel M. Halpern
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Gyan Mishra
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Tom Herbert
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain jmh.direct@joelhalpern.com
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Gyan Mishra
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Gyan Mishra
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Sander Steffann
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Warren Kumari
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Gyan Mishra
- RE: We don't seem to be following our processes (… Ron Bonica
- RE: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Ron Bonica
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Sander Steffann
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Gyan Mishra
- RE: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Ron Bonica
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain otroan
- RE: [spring] We don't seem to be following our pr… bruno.decraene
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Fernando Gont
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Tom Herbert
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Gyan Mishra
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Fernando Gont
- RE: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Ron Bonica
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Gyan Mishra
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Fernando Gont
- Re: topics to circulate Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: topics to circulate Gyan Mishra
- Re: topics to circulate Erik Kline
- Re: topics to circulate Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: topics to circulate Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: IPv6 header insertion in a controlled domain Alexandre Petrescu