IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: I-D Action: draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion-02.txt

Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> Thu, 30 November 2017 21:19 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 40A911294B7 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Nov 2017 13:19:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 JoGJBw6fglP6 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Nov 2017 13:19:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt0-x22c.google.com (mail-qt0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22c]) (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 7BD15127871 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Nov 2017 13:19:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id b10so2885580qti.11 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Nov 2017 13:19:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=lbgu00Yu/YojcxNithqTLw1z3XhOCw4yIX71L3myW4w=; b=WZZyHTJbBJVUiaJ32aYhhwHMoLMgzREhaRuoIdTxhXvlEO5rs0tm6rKTzQcuELJSBX aa5qheTciI0vDQxi1WRurrwE7sKYZy94nnTwViSNZvGyc+MmbjrhbFzNfsjK2RUB0TtP HOplJa5pkILAgFbXJ4iWzf06J7Akhm0UuEFo9E9DAVF/JSVgh6tRAD4diEKnRWJPcl0Z GZXzdL1jbyzqbXtQIuMTbQgo7a6D2vVdmAtdLc+28ou0Rpqtr/2mE2uOcWimVM1HbaLp n/MtVpOdH8YzGjer+pWMulmHch8n1ppFLIqryGo9ejzzssVQu6MCai4h0HsGTvEgToFt AjKg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=lbgu00Yu/YojcxNithqTLw1z3XhOCw4yIX71L3myW4w=; b=Crn9g2/gkFnTeeb3GQOftLPXWthLwAd2eOd0xlsxwZK3s+XByRVMXMPrTF3oA4wZM2 NhzP8vY/9wcDiMwkwSjxryN4f5lSCOPio6EBx9srHrcBg+cwVfcpbXSohwbMpJkDHh3g a78eeZVPfxDbWEygbTfVYA0pXtRH9YZMsm4fa0ED0S9SZ8apU/PfOn48ly86BEok9VEI /962wp77TCOVcjJ20n3qI6c2dzHCTnPRgIoJiAD/UImC8+X6k5PY8gMmrVt5Ptp0XSnh P6vLmUQxwmTtagMhW/23sG7JRtXKmpgiSMYUXSv9ESx1SRA9fo4xzgb59LhWgcIfR1+g kyjA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mJP+fWWzPF+9clABqYi1m0uBJukQ9Gie2c49I0d/MFDllrfV2k5 WlooD1BSlOf9c8Pq+clMeiZ7xYXC6RRwb3/b83eNtg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMYo/P0n/3MzKtP5oRy31IyjqYHEm9Qy3Lx5lqsxNmQq7uFAUxEP5N2jiUlAmEtWuIKPUrccy1xCxGlbiPI+n7Q=
X-Received: by 10.200.49.101 with SMTP id h34mr5505646qtb.112.1512076744518; Thu, 30 Nov 2017 13:19:04 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.200.43.121 with HTTP; Thu, 30 Nov 2017 13:19:04 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CA+b+ERnKbRXgFycgKd7EXMVvS1Mu_RTC5tfPbNE781TDZ49rYA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <151120281628.21912.1099097760493570225@ietfa.amsl.com> <4ca3fd6b-4cd6-f6ac-ce03-415c2c9a4c3c@gmail.com> <f4425076-2f76-5713-2819-9d26671d56bb@si6networks.com> <4E92F160-C586-4C7B-BAEF-97C204856A8A@employees.org> <bc9d7f57-8687-7f85-8ac3-49751683232b@si6networks.com> <CA+b+ERnKbRXgFycgKd7EXMVvS1Mu_RTC5tfPbNE781TDZ49rYA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 13:19:04 -0800
Message-ID: <CALx6S34XAA7Fo96Es9z1Yz+Eo9XdWvPHXmCAcw_WSzP8JNjKuQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion-02.txt
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Cc: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion@ietf.org, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/FPJv_Xb0sPb8NsrykedpdR4bsbQ>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 30 Nov 2017 21:19:07 -0000

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> wrote:
> Hi Fernando,
>
> So in the case of encapsulation you normally put the node performing the
> encap as source address. That may impact how you handle this packet via
> number of services or even by src-dst routing correct ?
>
Robert,

I don't understand your point. Isn't the underlying idea here to use
SR to source route a packet through a domain? I don't see why an outer
source address of a tunnel is relevant for that. Also, I'd point out
that encapsulation is hardly a new concept. It is well deployed in
various forms and many network services have already adapted to its
use.

> So while perhaps some may consider it "cleaner" I think both variants have
> their own use cases and should be supported.
>
It's not just about being cleaner, there are questions about
correctness that need to be addressed.

Tom

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email