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

Reji Thomas <> Wed, 27 May 2020 07:46 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 953AB3A0AF7 for <>; Wed, 27 May 2020 00:46:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i3xDPta-uBW3 for <>; Wed, 27 May 2020 00:46:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::132]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C15893A0AF5 for <>; Wed, 27 May 2020 00:46:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id h188so13911529lfd.7 for <>; Wed, 27 May 2020 00:46:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=VTqtPxfk3Kj9rsnqz4O7oQvH+ULb11WNzMbX7e+HmQE=; b=KqkTS8WIbSJiTF+V1eZaaos7wIeq1itX3SoJ8ZL1niceS6qqhaMfhMqSp6amXgrkbT Rmckw9uodaugqe/z8U7wUoSM2kusot/nk2ya1ncsxCtVGT1FSfrYIazGA8ElpHv2UGyG 2zpLvBbULWw3eISs5q35s6bUiC6oY9xYX0/ZT0+AydT9qKtq5Jhh4Vf6hLxeusSsrdwG SGAvheGXT3Ets3xkEhxxMN5svd5MJlOjUnce+/f1wR8Gs2b+pbkpfs44LAIXXQtc6RVV 7AauMQ0A+6HxTnntGZRHu1cCnHQHcznNVaZCvlkwBhwjuGwgU/D/w9s+xXUYFlNzrEi7 MuVw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=VTqtPxfk3Kj9rsnqz4O7oQvH+ULb11WNzMbX7e+HmQE=; b=dhDydjmpdZvT/HndNWmgC+I8FCCbzBHSfCHlZfe02AiPaD58PzTNNnTnaY1Ona8g9J x4u3yQzWbnAXBlPymwtRrnyyqp39hgDKMehzfX6lKXos7WAOH2SGy7DiW5S+N5WmQr8F oOi2uXFQx/AR123TB6gl05qAFqtKtiOksnOIDJ/cjsSRpZ9BoABqQzFnZfAMIK/VcpBv ThS03hWb62jwM2xDHPsUzIvpLqg7k3U2eQIUYhSaKo5jhNt+YDZCcqmUAQh2iWbttZfS J2A9voqA1tSlnJJ2MNPT2a6kseZMEsCTNMHlZAJWEBI7a4t+372Bi8QbHYSdD8JdZWjv d2uw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533EW7lRkvrukgOW04mui4xd7MVzXjiQgm7Fwclcky/Gis1xLe8V ir/CYzHpUnT/njSBpmw21LiXczddFS8hkGdZaA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyAqBaFBsxF9hZDeGRkvVrTQ8eM16zwYYtQfcUJPhlgy7grVhjI8pH4yzkyZ90uvbMqLemeRyICWebMHAFNnY8=
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4471:: with SMTP id y17mr2449140lfl.178.1590565587021; Wed, 27 May 2020 00:46:27 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Reji Thomas <>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 13:16:15 +0530
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: Adoption Call for "The IPv6 Compact Routing Header (CRH)"
To: Bob Hinden <>
Cc: IPv6 List <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ce7e9005a69c684b"
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 07:46:32 -0000

I support the adoption.

CRH is well defined, being conformant to the v6 architecture is a useful
addition to the existing IPv6 protocol building blocks.  CRH already has
asic based implementation which demonstrates  packet forwarding at line
rate and any concern on forwarding efficiency doesn’t hold ground.

On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 3:44 AM Bob Hinden <> wrote:

> 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
> 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
> Administrative Requests:
> --------------------------------------------------------------------