Re:Call for adoption: <draft-krishnan-6man-sids-00>

xiao.min2@zte.com.cn Mon, 11 April 2022 07:40 UTC

Return-Path: <xiao.min2@zte.com.cn>
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 72F8A3A1D8C for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 00:40:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.904
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.904 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, CTE_8BIT_MISMATCH=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 aa-Se3Qq0Bip for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 00:40:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxhk.zte.com.cn (mxhk.zte.com.cn [63.216.63.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07D503A1D81 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 00:40:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mse-fl2.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.30.14.239]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mxhk.zte.com.cn (FangMail) with ESMTPS id 4KcLNt347dz8R03w; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 15:40:14 +0800 (CST)
Received: from njxapp03.zte.com.cn ([10.41.132.202]) by mse-fl2.zte.com.cn with SMTP id 23B7dkOp061615; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 15:39:46 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from xiao.min2@zte.com.cn)
Received: from mapi (njxapp03[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid201; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 15:39:46 +0800 (CST)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2022 15:39:46 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2afb6253db423d2-83dea
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <202204111539462351481@zte.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <92790B16-19F8-40AD-BF8B-F9CBB619EE37@gmail.com>
References: 92790B16-19F8-40AD-BF8B-F9CBB619EE37@gmail.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: xiao.min2@zte.com.cn
To: bob.hinden@gmail.com
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org, bob.hinden@gmail.com
Subject: Re:Call for adoption: <draft-krishnan-6man-sids-00>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-MAIL: mse-fl2.zte.com.cn 23B7dkOp061615
X-Fangmail-Gw-Spam-Type: 0
X-FangMail-Miltered: at cgslv5.04-192.168.250.137.novalocal with ID 6253DB5E.000 by FangMail milter!
X-FangMail-Envelope: 1649662814/4KcLNt347dz8R03w/6253DB5E.000/10.30.14.239/[10.30.14.239]/mse-fl2.zte.com.cn/<xiao.min2@zte.com.cn>
X-Fangmail-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-Fangmail-MID-QID: 6253DB5E.000/4KcLNt347dz8R03w
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/RIymdC8bG97JQCQoNb1N4k6dvT0>
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 Apr 2022 07:40:23 -0000

Hi all,

I support WG adoption of this draft.

At the same time, I've noticed that RFC8200's rule on how to compute upper-layer checksum might be updated by the introduction of compressed SIDs.
In order to compute checksum for upper-layer protocol, section 8.1 of RFC 8200 defines the TCP and UDP "pseudo-header" for IPv6, with respect to the Destination Address of the "pseudo-header", it says
"      o  If the IPv6 packet contains a Routing header, the Destination
         Address used in the pseudo-header is that of the final
         destination.  At the originating node, that address will be in
         the last element of the Routing header; at the recipient(s),
         that address will be in the Destination Address field of the
         IPv6 header.
"
In one case of compressed SIDs, a Routing header isn't there and the IPv6 destination address isn't that of the final destination; In the other case of compressed SIDs, a Routing header is there and the destination address of the final destination isn't in the last element of the Routing header. For both cases section 8.1 of RFC 8200 needs update.

IMO the checksum issue needs to be recorded somewhere and this draft seems the right place, or I can initiate a new draft on this if it's preferred.

Best Regards,
Xiao Min
------------------原始邮件------------------
发件人:BobHinden
收件人:IPv6 List;
抄送人:Bob Hinden;
日 期 :2022年03月31日 04:32
主 题 :Call for adoption: <draft-krishnan-6man-sids-00>
This message starts a two week 6MAN call on adopting:
Title:          Segment Identifiers in SRv6
Authors:        S. Krishnan
File Name:      draft-krishnan-6man-sids-00
Document date:  February 10, 2022
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-krishnan-6man-sids-00
as a 6MAN working group document.
For background this draft was the result a query to the 6MAN working group from the SPRING w.g. chairs regarding regarding draft-filsfilscheng-spring-srv6-srh-compression.  The query was:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/5IpkHf5tVa-G4sKca-EWGEziYSo/
After an active discussion, the reply from the 6MAN chairs and ADs was:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/rGgpWZyPaKonLaeuT37D7qZ1Vcw/
This topic was also presented at IETF 112, slides here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/112/materials/slides-112-6man-srv6-sids-00
Substantive comments and statements of support for adopting this document should be sent to the mailing list.  Editorial suggestions can be sent to the author.  This adoption call will end on 13 April 2022.
Further, if you are willing to work on this document, either as contributor, author, or reviewer please notify the list.   This will provide the chairs with an indication of the energy level in the working group to work on this document.
Bob, Jen, Ole
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------