IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Adoption Call for "The IPv6 Compact Routing Header (CRH)"

"licong@chinatelecom.cn" <licong@chinatelecom.cn> Thu, 28 May 2020 09:59 UTC

Return-Path: <licong@chinatelecom.cn>
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 BF0043A0D16 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 May 2020 02:59:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.889
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.889 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 VIvEhcYFyEqU for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 May 2020 02:59:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from chinatelecom.cn (prt-mail.chinatelecom.cn [42.123.76.226]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 670A43A0BFA for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 May 2020 02:59:28 -0700 (PDT)
HMM_SOURCE_IP: 172.18.0.48:23302.1106165434
HMM_ATTACHE_NUM: 0000
HMM_SOURCE_TYPE: SMTP
Received: from clientip-106.121.136.187?logid-bd9b53801efd4789a426583001f1da1a (unknown [172.18.0.48]) by chinatelecom.cn (HERMES) with SMTP id 3573A280093 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 May 2020 17:59:24 +0800 (CST)
X-189-SAVE-TO-SEND: 71080549@chinatelecom.cn
Received: from ([172.18.0.48]) by App0024 with ESMTP id bd9b53801efd4789a426583001f1da1a for ipv6@ietf.org; Thu May 28 17:59:26 2020
X-Transaction-ID: bd9b53801efd4789a426583001f1da1a
X-filter-score: filter<0>
X-Real-From: licong@chinatelecom.cn
X-Receive-IP: 172.18.0.48
X-MEDUSA-Status: 0
Sender: licong@chinatelecom.cn
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 17:59:23 +0800
From: "licong@chinatelecom.cn" <licong@chinatelecom.cn>
To: "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Adoption Call for "The IPv6 Compact Routing Header (CRH)"
References: <2020052817263359822650@chinatelecom.cn>
X-Priority: 3
X-Has-Attach: no
X-Mailer: Foxmail 7.2.16.188[cn]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <2020052817592275337257@chinatelecom.cn>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_001_NextPart562485513750_=----"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/9u7M8e3Mh1qoGkiYp4AimNI9Aok>
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: Thu, 28 May 2020 09:59:32 -0000

Hi, 6man
 
I do not support the adoption of this work.
CRH defines a new data plane which is not compatible with SHR and SRv6. In addition, I think the use cases and security considerations are not clear enough.
I think it's not the right timing to adopt CRH. Until now，there are other SRv6 and SRH compatible solutions, we should  compare the advantages and disadvantages of different solutions and choose the best one.
 
Best regards
Cong Li
 
----------
发件人: ipv6 [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Bob Hinden
发送时间: 2020年5月16日 6:14
收件人: IPv6 List
抄送: Bob Hinden
主题: Adoption Call for "The IPv6 Compact Routing Header (CRH)"
 
This message starts a two-week 6MAN call on adopting:
 
 Title:          The IPv6 Compact Routing Header (CRH)
 Authors:        R. Bonica, Y. Kamite, T. Niwa, A. Alston, L. Jalil
 File Name:      draft-bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr-21
 Document date:  2020-05-14
 
 https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr
 
as a working group item. Substantive comments regarding adopting this document should be directed to the mailing list.  Editorial suggestions can be sent to the authors.
 
Please note that this is an adoption call, it is not a w.g. last call for advancement, adoption means that it will become a w.g. draft.  As the working group document, the w.g. will decide how the document should change going forward.
 
This adoption call will end on 29 May 2020.
 
The chairs note there has been a lot of discussions on the list about this draft.   After discussing with our area directors, we think it is appropriate to start a working group adoption call.  The authors have been active in resolving issues raised on the list.
 
Could those who are willing to work on this document, either as contributors, authors or reviewers please notify the list.   That gives us an indication of the energy level in the working group
to work on this.
 
Regards,
Bob and Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email