RE: Next steps with draft-dong-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id

Hi all,
Slicing is something fundamental/low_level. Slice ID should not be buried deep into the label or SID stack like VPN is.
HbH is the proper place for it. Hence, support for this draft.
Eduard
From: ipv6 [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Chongfeng Xie
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2021 9:07 AM
To: Dongjie (Jimmy) <jie.dong@huawei.com>
Cc: 6MAN <6man@ietf.org>; 6man Chairs <6man-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Next steps with draft-dong-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id

Hi， folks,

I think the extension to HBH header in this document is valuable.  It aligns with the HBH header processing, and provide an approach to efficiently identify the resources used for packet forwarding. This mechanism will be useful in IPv6 networks where a large number of network slices will be deployed.

Chongfeng

2021年8月5日 上午9:56，Dongjie (Jimmy) <jie.dong@huawei.com<mailto:jie.dong@huawei.com>> 写道：

Hi WG,

In last week’s IETF 111 meeting, we presented the update of draft-dong-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id. Due to limited meeting time, we didn’t have chance for comments and discussion.

As mentioned in the presentation, this version solves the comments received both in previous IETF meetings and on the mail list. Further review and comments are appreciated.

The authors believe this document is in the right direction of using HBH for per-hop forwarding treatment with a specific set of resources, and the content has become stable. Thus we would like to request for WG adoption of this document, thanks.

Best regards,
Jie
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org<mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------