Re: Header Insertion and TI-FA
Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com> Mon, 11 May 2020 13:41 UTC
Return-Path: <hayabusagsm@gmail.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 2EF823A0AE0 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 May 2020 06:41:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
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=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 wwm6glI2J4My for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 May 2020 06:41:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-il1-x12d.google.com (mail-il1-x12d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12d]) (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 F05783A0ADA for <6man@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 May 2020 06:41:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-il1-x12d.google.com with SMTP id x2so8455442ilp.13 for <6man@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 May 2020 06:41:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=PIvxjlOQU7OQ/GjQJ87Tj9YGP/auwupUjkpNJWyHsBs=; b=ABYDnkIEkD20Oi16f/mf5+8DYI3jciDAeECplIXHHhITt8F9PAuzp1hP3v9y3iuuOY cbFJG47CHhtem/MujBkr5lv8wfuc8wT+WD689SKGqsuHL7b3AO9pxK7Aksye/HrSpVIu 6xd1D1UgiVCfmdwIE7fNkPfWbVDRzTkmNU05ea/4tcz99v5k2ztdu3mTLILp8wzqsbff dNThnqzfdBbhesSucR1KfoXW3SMFgTqRuX2okKbK+llkvj0L09tmBXcebD30aNTstcIv 8N6SH7fy2G3HC6+y8RF4DmviOYevkzm+5JAbM/WZx6MjU5nJZ8mDeORp992fAVy+9X8/ h/Bg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PIvxjlOQU7OQ/GjQJ87Tj9YGP/auwupUjkpNJWyHsBs=; b=GZ1qJXdtJiicI58JRG0t6Tn8nF0f2PRq9FUJZUcMPggKEnrT25lVBWRXikhTEe3l2+ MueLDxbSNuGYZ00yhICqI+Yky/Wx6P73QFd1hmVfao8J8oHDblkcpDPUYeZQVmjEcU1o HpQd0flQLeArR84fQzuE98df58a7FWlMU2pgmp6oVN/TW6s54d5fuAIStC8lh6DVUDXE YrsgvRZbs0dc7F1ZT6xZ+MZMRjgUAMVUo+2TU3VNrzKHP+TJUZrlp4pp8ZUOVpI1+x3R IIBH1hCqAMX9ePVmcJxs77bVXGWR/ACzN6FALnJDx0VpqkXlQiblykEDmmEGPzsVm/6s 8ngA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuZaNLNFRIIcQJoZWRoNKkwV/TPig+zEkBxCjVorzIkhPQs+NQKf 3otknVyNXXPnakC7+erR8+EbgpEOJjSdwEjc8weaGc7gLfI=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypLnmc7fch04DjoPEhz2iGOFLbNVGnhPKLkTTKhxjViJHL3wD44tJORNqf0lXkEdiVxTofnQvTRzOwyK9RcqUm0=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:4cd:: with SMTP id f13mr16472712ils.300.1589204503963; Mon, 11 May 2020 06:41:43 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <DM6PR05MB6348FA1FC00258ACE4FDE444AEA10@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CABNhwV3-dMPg6SAAEz+uWre-rj6j5=1JgyyQyKyz_qn7f7mJwQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABNhwV3-dMPg6SAAEz+uWre-rj6j5=1JgyyQyKyz_qn7f7mJwQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 09:41:33 -0400
Message-ID: <CABNhwV2aVjk7+ESNRLZCgfLq0CC9vJHysaJ4htteg7SgWJrU-g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Header Insertion and TI-FA
To: Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: 6man <6man@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ef2d0e05a55f810c"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/Objkfs2q_tBWDEZaX5cu6GtJutk>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Mon, 11 May 2020 13:41:48 -0000
Sorry on the merge point PQ node I forgot to mention removal of the additional 6in6 encapsulation added at PLR node. Fixed. IPv6 6in6 encapsulation- SR source node EH SRH type 4 inserted (steering packet PGM) IPv6 6in6 encapsulation - PLR node EH SRH type 4 inserted ( steer to merge point PQ node) Payload At the merge point PQ node the “6in6 encapsulation” and EH SRH header added at the PLR node is now removed. Packet is now steered via the original SRH header inserted at the SRv6 source node to the PSP node. PSP pseudocode SL== 1 ; SL = SL -1 ; decrement pointer Remove EH SRH header Forward packet to USP egress PE end node. USP egress PE endpoint SL=O USD - remove 6in6 encapsulation Send packet to IPv6 routing engine L3 vpn End.x function processing Spring - Please provide section within PGM that has the verbiage of the 6in6 encapsulation at the PLR node. On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 9:35 AM Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Ron > > I was thinking the same this past weekend as well. > > So at the PLR node which could be any transit P router in the core. So to > create that bypass transit path FRR link and node protection Next Next hop > (NNH) path around the failed node or link, an EH header is inserted in > flight on the PLR node to the merge point PQ node for the bypass flow 50ms > failover. > > So the agreement we came up with end of last year with Spring, is to add a > 6in6 encapsulation along with EH insertion of the type 4 SRH header at the > PLR node to the merge point PQ node to be in compliance with RFC 8200. The > additional encapsulation would in essence appear like the SRv6 source node > performing the encapsulation. > > I looked in the PGM and SRH draft but I could not find the verbiage of the > update to add to additional 6in6 encapsulatio > > So how would the packet look now? > > IPv6 6in6 encapsulation- SR source node > EH SRH type 4 inserted (steering packet PGM) > IPv6 6in6 encapsulation - PLR node > EH SRH type 4 inserted ( steer to merge point PQ node) > Payload > > At the merge point PQ node the EH SRH header is removed. > > Packet is now steered via the original SRH header inserted at the SRv6 > source node to the PSP node. > > PSP pseudocode > SL== 1 ; SL = SL -1 ; decrement pointer > Remove EH SRH header > > Forward packet to USP egress PE end node. > > USP egress PE endpoint SL=O > > USD - remove 6in6 encapsulation > Send packet to IPv6 routing engine L3 vpn > End.x function processing > > > Spring - Please provide section within PGM that has the verbiage of the > 6in6 encapsulation at the PLR node. > > Thanks > > Gyan > > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 8:57 AM Ron Bonica <rbonica= > 40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > >> Folks, >> >> >> >> Happy Monday! >> >> >> >> As I was painting this weekend, I remembered that the use-case for IPv6 >> Header insertion is TI-LFA. This made the following questions come to mind: >> >> >> >> - How does TI-LFA work when the original packet already contains a >> routing header? Will it insert a second, so that the packet has two routing >> headers? >> - How does TI-LFA work when the node directly upstream of the link >> (i.e., the PLR) is not a segment endpoint? Will it insert an routing >> header? Is that consistent with 8200? >> >> >> >> >> Ron >> >> >> >> >> >> Juniper Business Use Only >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list >> ipv6@ietf.org >> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > -- > > Gyan Mishra > > Network Engineering & Technology > > Verizon > > Silver Spring, MD 20904 > > Phone: 301 502-1347 > > Email: gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com > > > > -- Gyan Mishra Network Engineering & Technology Verizon Silver Spring, MD 20904 Phone: 301 502-1347 Email: gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com
- Header Insertion and TI-FA Ron Bonica
- Re: Header Insertion and TI-FA Gyan Mishra
- Re: Header Insertion and TI-FA Gyan Mishra
- RE: Header Insertion and TI-FA Ron Bonica
- Re: Header Insertion and TI-FA Robert Raszuk
- Other use cases for header insertion (was Re: Hea… Tom Herbert
- Re: Header Insertion and TI-FA Tom Herbert
- Re: Header Insertion and TI-FA Krzysztof Szarkowicz
- Re: Header Insertion and TI-FA Gyan Mishra
- RE: Header Insertion and TI-FA Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril)
- Re: Header Insertion and TI-FA Andrew Alston
- Re: Header Insertion and TI-FA Andrew Alston
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Mark Smith
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Robert Raszuk
- Re: Header Insertion and TI-FA Gyan Mishra
- Re: Header Insertion and TI-FA Mark Smith
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Nick Hilliard
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Tom Herbert
- Re: Header Insertion and TI-FA Andrew Alston
- Re: Header Insertion and TI-FA Gyan Mishra
- RE: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Ron Bonica
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Robert Raszuk
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Stewart Bryant
- RE: Header Insertion and TI-FA Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril)
- RE: Header Insertion and TI-FA Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril)
- RE: Header Insertion and TI-FA Andrew Alston
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Toerless Eckert
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Robert Raszuk
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Header Insertion and TI-FA Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Mark Smith
- Re: Header Insertion and TI-FA Mark Smith
- Re: Header Insertion and TI-FA Robert Raszuk
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… S Moonesamy
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Stewart Bryant
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Robert Raszuk
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Stewart Bryant
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Tom Herbert
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Uma Chunduri
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Fernando Gont
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Uma Chunduri
- Re: Other use cases for header insertion (was Re:… Fernando Gont