SR and loops
Hemant Singh <hemantietf@gmail.com> Thu, 17 November 2016 18:11 UTC
Return-Path: <hemantietf@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 D6EB61299BE for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 10:11:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 SD3k2RLZ4TR9 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 10:11:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-it0-x232.google.com (mail-it0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::232]) (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 D4DE3127076 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 10:11:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-it0-x232.google.com with SMTP id y23so67542847itc.0 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 10:11:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=RqQph+Zi/FSFjbH+mxKvrvViFnffwBOaC4IEU40eetM=; b=TlTuNg4GnNAmqMGvhqvpYxQrrj5AtUEeArG+XZcUWL+hVWLlLex2SfQMGW4jGYp2/W Dv9TWwTg+/EP9NSMdN8dr4RkJyXQm828kcsKwgU506atGf8ZWXpx4fekL/ITh5e132En 53JwmxKWtDCAJpD0K8qmN1DxB33FoijugcJkUP76AlzwqQK5GbJa00pGLZchtnHekZLQ grH/4ehMD04e6ekqcVVJqlJAHywZhP/bTi8lQEmKeZYVWmuT9BRlfHdxlZ2HdUD8/xxa 7A+GqEmRaLbD2Mdb3vZx7RCseR+ED7CGzTTEHegZXxcabPYVtW9d/8GfQIZm0JLjjDf2 P8QA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=RqQph+Zi/FSFjbH+mxKvrvViFnffwBOaC4IEU40eetM=; b=K69fy/j6h4hQ4yuKIEFuGSRIfjlaoOkoZ6LhA/qzxzkLEkOqV/LNX1RyyEcCNR1Z6X rbcIofaMP0HpXE0NQWfNd787QNiiV0F8FG169wvG26EuH8/lEvChsw+JCNjUmvvpiab9 XiXERhc2Feg/cjVSQ2GM7Ak8bzyuQSPKjwEV3bY/4o86JPl5KhMT6OEWF97mM3ITGxzI ljMs2Tz/DPO9VnnoKeUqb+SvFkmYlVkAmlQR6ZlShjpvnLvfwSWIZSq2bLP1jxnR0u59 Fu+zlnxLMx8lpgt95tjtlrEi/1+JCWf3QYDmLxzknpzAQxHEYKpDHni+j95pXUGdDsoQ dI2Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC01j7tRKZ61Z6tZOpqtTF7ltUd287qO1SPjtToR1fBN5FhGqbnitPXBAmyTpONvUfXeXrbaJTk9slxY1bA==
X-Received: by 10.202.8.144 with SMTP id 138mr1915429oii.22.1479406260267; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 10:11:00 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.182.15.33 with HTTP; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 10:10:59 -0800 (PST)
From: Hemant Singh <hemantietf@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 13:10:59 -0500
Message-ID: <CABdyVt5wC_+ko7JVM_fDHDj-U7PrbU7hy9RfO9n_geeLLSCXKw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: SR and loops
To: "Stefano Previdi (sprevidi)" <sprevidi@cisco.com>, cfilsfil@cisco.com, bruno.decraene@orange.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c12e3d89f32020541831c0c"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/QZcYSZ2ca-YuWvgGQ4WqAHLOEYQ>
Cc: IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>, 神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp>, Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 17 Nov 2016 18:11:07 -0000
This is the SR document I am talking about. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-09 Here is a high-level perspective. MPLS uses BGP and has routers maintain state which avoids routing loops. SR claims to have removed state from the routers for simplification. If state is removed, how does SR handle routing loops that could arise when a link fails in the path? I don't see the draft addressing such an issue. I just subscribed to the spring mailer today - am waiting for approval and thus the email to 6man where protocols for IPv6 are discussed sometimes. Thanks, Hemant
- SR and loops Hemant Singh
- Re: SR and loops Stefano Previdi (sprevidi)