RE: [spring] Is srv6 PSP a good idea

Andrew Alston <> Wed, 26 February 2020 14:25 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 114C43A087D for <>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 06:25:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1df0avp_GJDr for <>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 06:25:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55D3F3A07D5 for <>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 06:24:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (Using TLS) by with ESMTP id uk-mta-164-1JPFpiSPO6WvO85RQr4fdA-1; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:24:50 +0000
X-MC-Unique: 1JPFpiSPO6WvO85RQr4fdA-1
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2750.21; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:24:48 +0000
Received: from ([fe80::31cd:8171:1d1f:2fa9]) by ([fe80::31cd:8171:1d1f:2fa9%5]) with mapi id 15.20.2750.021; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:24:48 +0000
From: Andrew Alston <>
To: Andrew Alston <>, Sander Steffann <>, Robert Raszuk <>
CC: "" <>, 6man WG <>
Subject: RE: [spring] Is srv6 PSP a good idea
Thread-Topic: [spring] Is srv6 PSP a good idea
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:24:48 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: [2c0f:fe40:3:1:4a7:7d57:f0b4:cca7]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 8945c55d-83da-4d78-a57b-08d7bac7a29d
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DBBPR03MB5383:
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508;
x-forefront-prvs: 0325F6C77B
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(4636009)(366004)(376002)(39860400002)(396003)(346002)(136003)(199004)(189003)(66476007)(5660300002)(76116006)(71200400001)(4326008)(2940100002)(478600001)(54906003)(7696005)(66946007)(66446008)(52536014)(33656002)(64756008)(66556008)(110136005)(6506007)(81156014)(186003)(8676002)(55016002)(86362001)(81166006)(316002)(2906002)(8936002)(9686003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DBBPR03MB5383;; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: hZmQEy0YQNC8uB97iL6VvqxnRDLHDIXbTuSLk+z4rK4kUz2sXaT4X3snIe8v8mLOQdHiO4NzkoXZ5igMFx2DG6uIqUcwORmyFk7ROJcJfarIxL97mUYrE0O/S6kX7dhcOjsUE77nah2wBfb75PFm331vNLavgxR+YhfrZ27fVlXMpA9+KDM/qA5X0LjrggF6FfQNBlCbrzknAtlFthKSQLz8DvcHurkHDhOQ0tpIonOluZu0JqmD+3mqp/VAWC4Pu57zHEJ0dBB5we/VCbWkuHRaI17s1Prq94Ka1+2qLOXrjiqKgWWMPAtLslV4P3pVbCnp1elCrBks73uYz42VtEBfYKVQqDEhZFzTqYQ8rD2iOZzcjOnIWs4i9m/UDV+7XEvFLo/bwv4bgrW/Jqx+pBx9mH70z/INP8bVVTu8XQxkP/dPvM/7oC3iBYoCwZKw
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: qFiLOO9nHfPIfVG8SzRBuEPpwInqKA7vqAbeiug94YMLk08Fxc+ViiOqPcADKiZpVQnm4j0HyF95Kyf69qmdS3Wt+BsoTKtqo8oO4LLQB7cbJKXptqOATZsVAKvKMLVHwgbHDuUb8QL4B40CDzItG58Jly8O1jhHeLX9+XKOK2aublzZxqLBXPsUTgYK+F+Cbwz4g83a21xdn+Nm19XSnQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 8945c55d-83da-4d78-a57b-08d7bac7a29d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 Feb 2020 14:24:48.4254 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 68792612-0f0e-46cb-b16a-fcb82fd80cb1
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: BRsYuq7r9ogRiZXIYdS9eZPhFH/ZxusHmL8UPAjnGxL65SJW6oFEITvzrn7wA2PgYPSfRDp+JRiZt6AvKc/ZVUEY4JdFNaFvJ1VXC7qwpBs=
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DBBPR03MB5383
X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DBBPR03MB5415C910A5FE36C9769BB8B4EEEA0DBBPR03MB5415eurp_"
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: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:25:11 -0000

Figured I'd add to this - as I continued to read the charter

SPRING WG should avoid modification to existing data planes that would
make them incompatible with existing deployments. Where possible,
existing control and management plane protocols must be used within
existing architectures to implement the SPRING function. Any
modification of -or extension to- existing architectures, data planes,
or control or management plane protocols should be carried out in the
WGs responsible for the architecture, data plane, or control or
management plane protocol being modified and in coordination with the
SPRING WG, but may be done in SPRING WG after agreement with all the
relevant WG chairs and responsible Area Directors.

If SRv6 is not IPv6 - as is the contention - (which in my view is an absolutely false contention designed to step around a specification because it simply doesn't suite what you want) - well - then what exactly are we doing here - because by that claim - we are inventing a new control plane, a new data plane, and well, it's a new protocol - so - do we have the agreement of the relevant WG chairs, Area Directors etc - to invent an entirely new everything.

Didn't think so....