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

[Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]>]

Hi Gyan,
one comment to

CRH uses a new CRH-16 or CRH-32 RH which has a list of routing segments.
The routing segment is an index which identifies a CRH-FIB entry contains
an IPv6 address of the next hop to steer the packet.  The CRH-FIB can be
populated via CLI locally or PCE controller centralized model  or
distributed model via IGP extension.

I believe that is equally applicable to the Unified SID proposal
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mirsky-6man-unified-id-sr/> that is
based on RFC 8754. The Unified SID does not introduce new RH types but
rather explicitly expresses the length of SID/index in the Flags field of
SRH. Would you agree that functionally CRH and the Unified SID are very
close?

Regards,
Greg

On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 8:40 PM Gyan Mishra <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
> CRH is not a mapping based solution like SR-MPLS where each segment or SID
> is a label allocated from the SRBB to build the dynamic path or binding sid
> to create a SR-TE per VRF tunnel color mapping.
>
> The only thing in common between CRH and SRv6 is they both utilize the
> IPv6 data plane and they both can be used for traffic steering.  How CRH
> achieves the traffic steering is completely different then SRv6.  SRv6
> performs steering natively using SRH and prefix SID end instantiation and
> adjacency SID end.x instantiation and for per VRF custom traffic coloring
> and use of flex algo utilizes SR-TE binding SID at the source node to
> instantiate the steered path.
>
> CRH does not use labels or index  for the segments in the SRH header as
> does SR-MPLS which uses MPLS labels as SID for hop by hop steering or uses
> an IPV6 128 bit address or a compressed or index based compressed IPv6
> address as the SID instruction for steering.
>
> CRH uses a new CRH-16 or CRH-32 RH which has a list of routing segments.
> The routing segment is an index which identifies a CRH-FIB entry contains
> an IPv6 address of the next hop to steer the packet.  The CRH-FIB can be
> populated via CLI locally or PCE controller centralized model  or
> distributed model via IGP extension.
>
> The CRH draft is a component of SRM6 Spring draft which is why it states
> that the CRH-FIB can be populated via IGP.  However the CRH draft can act
> independently and a lean low overhead steering method and in that scenario
> only CLI or PCE methods are available to populate the CRH-FIB.
>
> In the context of Spring,  SRM6 draft has the same capabilities as SRV6 or
> SR-MPLS and uses the same binding sid with SR-TE for per VRF coloring with
> flex algo for steering Inter or intra domain in a service provider network.
>
> CRH is a very lean draft that does not have those same capabilities of
> steering with SR-TE but it does support flex algo as that is IGP extension
> independent of SR.  All the steering by CRH is done natively using the new
> routing headers.
>
> Kind Regards
>
> Gyan
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:25 PM Mach Chen <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> If the draft intents to provide a mapping based Segment Routing solution,
>> there are SR-MPLS, SR-MPLS over IP exist, and there are implementations
>> that work very well; seems no need to define a new one;
>>
>> If the draft intents to provide a header compression solution to SRv6,
>> there are several candidate solutions under discussion; seems it's
>> premature to consider just adopting one and ignoring others;
>>
>> If the draft intents to be one of the building blocks of a new competing
>> IPv6 based Segment Routing solution, given the community has been working
>> on SRv6 for so many years, it needs to prove that the new solution has much
>> better merits than SRv6;
>>
>> So, based on the above, I do not support the adoption at this moment.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Mach
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: ipv6 [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Bob Hinden
>> > Sent: Saturday, May 16, 2020 6:14 AM
>> > To: IPv6 List <[e-mail]>
>> > Cc: Bob Hinden <[e-mail]>
>> > Subject: 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
>> >
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
> --
>
> <http://www.verizon.com/>
>
> *Gyan Mishra*
>
> *Network Solutions A**rchitect *
>
>
>
> *M 301 502-134713101 Columbia Pike *Silver Spring, MD
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> [e-mail]
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>