Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr
Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> Sat, 11 November 2023 14:48 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 87361C1524A3 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 11 Nov 2023 06:48:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.106 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=herbertland.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T43jIPCrCw_m for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 11 Nov 2023 06:48:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pj1-x102e.google.com (mail-pj1-x102e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102e]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6621FC1522B9 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 11 Nov 2023 06:48:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pj1-x102e.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-28028f92709so2306562a91.0 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 11 Nov 2023 06:48:03 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=herbertland.com; s=google; t=1699714082; x=1700318882; darn=ietf.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=l+k1Mv/qTT9pwTGW9P32qUeUg7/W+qvH+qMpx+GVGQ0=; b=Nr+7MaKG/POUqph2BLETDzAeAy78tT61lF/oAs2QDM7A+dCU920k+jqw0ICRa+R5d7 vM0zn4TR7zuzVHPpZDG80PspWhEaCLxCmEY2Mzo4iZU4u1UBlJhkKoHDlhxFFsn8Jlwm KzRjXrRp1DioHkD6Xp9lxtChkfO1iFLL+zlQuENjIUrFmJ7StYLEsxvdSV7tXL9WtHBw 0U9ykYKOUTcX/O3DjLAHw+wcNFqVl1JYLSdb+jcdBY3NVr1EXJElCwtoGbFg1IR+Uvbs EDrEUqYTd3bluopkCPKjHhQ7WpX+C7dKFFIdA/L6SvGAOjrZVVXMQ1vSP+On6H58+rH0 rV7g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1699714082; x=1700318882; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=l+k1Mv/qTT9pwTGW9P32qUeUg7/W+qvH+qMpx+GVGQ0=; b=KC6WtpoaHQUi28avypKMH0RtTdYNyVBnwNToCM09ErR/7b64RcPoLRjpCRjRfXK4CN SRcDwhXG/i/Jn3x/Nb3/uUhjZ5nfhWBr3McsU5R9vWKOIIYJ5vAJ7GNYq8cANocELxlZ bZi+T6TkBzLFi50v5eIfZU0oCuj5HR3WKLwIC3KX2DSvVAzb2Wxx7C4dUpGvGdo5VQHK t/uYsbLfF4zayMpdHcWY5jGVBWlKL2NTSlI9uSdZ3C2gX5gzGxpx4d1jyVE0svHbPUhq QIkVVsevkbOvYMhMcCMUIXZf48NP7BKCB2t1UOZpViqa2WxHADH2PVDngZLqrj5OyuH5 Jg3w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwXKvsqhBRfRCygD1rG/2ueQCxCk7TAOekHUAZlxGZ5emqFRfp3 Vj8wMBWEjme+7abmx8UVorPn3UeqtN5ODzEpIz8XnA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGzq48ZPGzpbZ26ssj2iz1qMRPzxPVRFXFq0NVBNGW/1E8+ke9H9zpZZ6CzAcu1a5bexiHrMpMfvxgbr2yN//Y=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:3a89:b0:27c:df02:88b3 with SMTP id om9-20020a17090b3a8900b0027cdf0288b3mr3156476pjb.8.1699714082311; Sat, 11 Nov 2023 06:48:02 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAFU7BARQLAS+w7kKUPSBgFacc5GXNAaJ97qkJg9VyjbhoNibcQ@mail.gmail.com> <6bbf20ae2c9c410fafb8f3277692f318@huawei.com> <BL0PR05MB531616592B9991F244184A8CAEAFA@BL0PR05MB5316.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <ZU5FFXNWUr3UKP3u@dwc-laptop.local> <BL0PR05MB5316BF929695A1EC4024E2D1AEAEA@BL0PR05MB5316.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CAOj+MMFr061ORLjQjgoF-YieK8_EMpb9uhSoSEWGJc6UudU_AA@mail.gmail.com> <CAO42Z2xfXBMTwtDA4PHtkLpcc4V13NpdEfnp5XJEoUhv6X5upA@mail.gmail.com> <CAOj+MME=xDLQ2NGzimaM1yJhwx8kgiASGqRJoaCy=ME171GjuA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOj+MME=xDLQ2NGzimaM1yJhwx8kgiASGqRJoaCy=ME171GjuA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2023 06:47:50 -0800
Message-ID: <CALx6S37d4NhGH7oExP9FQM503S2+FA0vNo2yjup8ov6j+BN28A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Cc: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>, Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>, 6man <ipv6@ietf.org>, draft-bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr.authors@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/LjbOD4tekFh7EqkLk5upVD11RjY>
Subject: Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Sat, 11 Nov 2023 14:48:07 -0000
On Sat, Nov 11, 2023 at 1:13 AM Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> wrote: > > Hi Mark, > > Since you mentioned IETF and exp status of the RFCs. Just one question ... > > This draft clearly defines a solution for source packet routing. There is dedicated WG for that called SPRING with charter which says: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/spring/about/ > > So shouldn't 6man wait till SPRING WG adopts as at least a WG doc CRH framework or CRH architecture document before it adopts draft-bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr with proposed RH extensions ? > > Few more points .... > > > No overloading of the IPv6 Destination Address field > > We have been through this debate too many times. I do not think there is any overloading. Since the early days of IPv6 concept the remaining 64 bits were meant to be used locally as it seems fit the operator. See the draft from Feb 22, 1996: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipngwg-unicast-addr-fmt/03/ > > > No modification of packet analysis tools such as 'tcpdump' and 'wireshark' > > I am afraid those tools are meant to accommodate new encoding in the packets. Do not see a problem there. If we would go by this observation we should just delacare networking as completed and close IETF, IEEE, IRTF etc ... Robert, I don't understand what you mean here. tcpdump and wireshark are continually extended to support new protocols, and they are essential tools in diagnosing problems in networks. I don't think they can be dismissed so easily. And if they are incapable of decoding SRv6 packets, can you provide a reference to the tools that are able to do that? Thanks, Tom > > > Complex equals more things that can break. > > True but very subjective. > > Cheers, > Robert > > > On Sat, Nov 11, 2023 at 3:59 AM Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Robert, >> >> On Sat, 11 Nov 2023, 08:32 Robert Raszuk, <robert@raszuk.net> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Ron, >>> >>> Is there any single technical advantage when comparing functionality of SR with micro-SID to the proposed CRH encoding ? I can't find any in your draft. >> >> >> >> No overloading of the IPv6 Destination Address field with a sequence of multiple destination identifiers, as micro-SID is doing. >> >> No modification of packet analysis tools such as 'tcpdump' and 'wireshark' to decode the overloading that has occurred in the IPv6 DA field. >> >> Overloading of existing fields (or variables in programming code) with different semantics, structures and processing adds complexity. Complex equals more things that can break. >> >> >>> >>> Sure it is fun to experiment and even more fun to demonstrate that something you invented works in practical ways. But is IETF a playground for experimentation or for solving real customer issues in as little as possible ways ? >> >> >> I think your question is directly answered by the existence of the Experimental status of RFCs. >> >> The increased operational costs of dealing with the complexity of an overloaded, commonly used field is a real customer issue. The chance of human error goes up. Troubleshooting is harder and takes longer. >> >> Regards, >> Mark. >> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Robert >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list >>> ipv6@ietf.org >>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > ipv6@ietf.org > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > --------------------------------------------------------------------
- [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-comp-r… Jen Linkova
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Mark Smith
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Andrew Alston - IETF
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Daniam Henriques
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… 李星
- Re: [IPv6] [EXTERNAL] Adoption call for draft-bon… Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Reji Thomas
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Alvaro Retana
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Ron Bonica
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Alvaro Retana
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Ron Bonica
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Nick Buraglio
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Mark Smith
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Mark Smith
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Joel Halpern
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Joel Halpern
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Joel Halpern
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Joel Halpern
- [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (Was R… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Tony Przygienda
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Tony Przygienda
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Justin Iurman
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Tony Przygienda
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Mark Smith
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Joel Halpern
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Ron Bonica
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Ron Bonica
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Ron Bonica
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Tony Przygienda
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Tony Przygienda
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Ron Bonica
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Bob Hinden
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Bob Hinden
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Jingrong Xie
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Michael Richardson
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Mark Smith
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Ron Bonica
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… gengnan
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Ron Bonica
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Tony Przygienda
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Dale W. Carder
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Ron Bonica
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Mark Smith
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Bob Hinden
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Dale W. Carder
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Mark Smith
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Ketan Talaulikar
- [IPv6] Segment routing without SRH [was: Re: Rout… John Scudder
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Stefano Salsano
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Ron Bonica
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Mark Smith
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Wim Henderickx (Nokia)
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Ron Bonica
- Re: [IPv6] Segment routing without SRH [was: Re: … Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Ron Bonica
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Mark Smith
- Re: [IPv6] Segment routing without SRH [was: Re: … Suresh Krishnan
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [IPv6] Segment routing without SRH [was: Re: … Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Mark Smith
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Mark Smith
- [IPv6] pcap{ng} for RFC Michael Richardson
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [IPv6] Routing Headers and limited domains (W… Ron Bonica
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Tony Przygienda
- Re: [IPv6] Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-co… Wim Henderickx (Nokia)