RE: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-alt-mark-07.txt

Giuseppe Fioccola <> Fri, 23 July 2021 08:19 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 493A03A0AC4; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 01:19:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.196
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.196 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GVWflXJuKN9j; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 01:19:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 92C653A0AC6; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 01:19:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown []) by (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4GWMPc6ZxHz6H75P; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 16:07:48 +0800 (CST)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2176.2; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 10:19:25 +0200
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.01.2176.012; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 10:19:25 +0200
From: Giuseppe Fioccola <>
To: Mike Simpson <>
CC: Erik Kline <>, Yoshifumi Nishida <>, "" <>, Christopher Wood <>, "" <>
Subject: RE: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-alt-mark-07.txt
Thread-Topic: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-alt-mark-07.txt
Thread-Index: AQHXf5VoEeiWhDaRmEKOhylCD9QmaqtQNEwA
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2021 08:19:25 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_5cd00f25326146619c699160d671a4f2huaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
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: Fri, 23 Jul 2021 08:19:38 -0000

Hi Mike,
To avoid misunderstanding, the precondition of controlled domain may be kept as MUST. We can further specify that authentication MUST be used if, for specific scenarios, it is applied outside a controlled domain.



From: Mike Simpson <>
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2021 9:36 AM
To: Giuseppe Fioccola <>
Cc: Erik Kline <>; Yoshifumi Nishida <>;; Christopher Wood <>;
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-alt-mark-07.txt

Why not just keep it at MUST so that you don’t pollute the internets.

We will end up having to filter for it anyway as always but it seems foolhardy and unpleasant to intentionally weaken the language.

Your new hotness belongs in your controlled domain. If you are going to try and force it onto networks you don’t control then it’s not going to work and you will end up having to tunnel it anyways.

Why is this so hard to understand?

On 22 Jul 2021, at 15:09, Giuseppe Fioccola <<>> wrote:

Hi Erik,
Thanks for the input.
I tend to agree that the condition “MUST” can be changed to “SHOULD”. I can address your comments in the -08 version.



From: Erik Kline <<>>
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2021 11:15 PM
To: Giuseppe Fioccola <<>>
Cc: Stewart Bryant <<>>; Christopher Wood <<>>; Yoshifumi Nishida <<>>;<>;<>
Subject: Re: FW: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-alt-mark-07.txt


I think in S2.1 "MUST NOT" be used outside a "controlled domain" is perhaps a bit too strong.  Similarly in S6, "MUST be applied in...controlled domains" might be moderated down to "SHOULD only be applied...".

I'll note that it is possible for an AH option to be used to ensure the DstOpt variant is unmodified en route, and these two in conjunction can be used wherever desired to send such packets outside the given domain (subject, of course, to all the middlebox interference any such packet would inevitably receive -- but that's a separate issue).

On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 11:27 AM Giuseppe Fioccola <<>> wrote:
Dear Stewart, Christopher, Yoshi, All,
Please note that I just submitted a new version of the draft. It has been thoroughly reviewed to address the comments received during the Last Call.

Your inputs are always welcome.



-----Original Message-----
From: ipv6 <<>> On Behalf Of<>
Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2021 8:13 PM
Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-alt-mark-07.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Maintenance WG of the IETF.

        Title           : IPv6 Application of the Alternate Marking Method
        Authors         : Giuseppe Fioccola
                          Tianran Zhou
                          Mauro Cociglio
                          Fengwei Qin
                          Ran Pang
        Filename        : draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-alt-mark-07.txt
        Pages           : 21
        Date            : 2021-06-22

   This document describes how the Alternate Marking Method can be used
   as a passive performance measurement tool in an IPv6 domain.  It
   defines a new Extension Header Option to encode Alternate Marking
   information in both the Hop-by-Hop Options Header and Destination
   Options Header.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:

There is also an htmlized version available at:

A diff from the previous version is available at:

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:

IETF IPv6 working group mailing list<>
Administrative Requests:
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list<>
Administrative Requests: