IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPv6] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-6man-comp-rtg-hdr

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Sun, 07 January 2024 20:05 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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 9E91DC14F60B for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Jan 2024 12:05:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.807
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.807 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sandelman.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kKMwuzODUGm6 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Jan 2024 12:05:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AEDF2C14F5FC for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 7 Jan 2024 12:05:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EDAB1800D; Sun, 7 Jan 2024 15:05:26 -0500 (EST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id nBZfQbOVyOlE; Sun, 7 Jan 2024 15:05:25 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45E891800C; Sun, 7 Jan 2024 15:05:25 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1704657925; bh=BbQaIY59JZG++vlzIHm5rHn+aBN7fggAalIdh++yKj0=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=PmzynUne+aX8Vh9TVgmzAItXqyirRJQteXkTIbCAStZHKtTSo8kAjREz58Rzlvb+h j/+TYvbG08HUlIw5FTuI0fNrou4M6JiZZr+FBSLZTOgkWQdtDaiyDYgnG8XNizEtUQ /mz0kcZA0OVPpAQVVr+N6VMJhCXNQ1QAH/bBAQO7pa7SGqxQMsahfNgXJnD30beoey dQj/ZxfVrDwtOr5FZ+5D9wT7lsFi4DJOEvmdF67nxKrbv55SzHKuTQUVcdB/3aY3cr lEIyNp4OtzOaGosDrB8gStrU/i+UwRFTnreoT6hEq5+MBbXbeIfzhuFdxzqs0dUUjw UyRTjwUYCVW+g==
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C01320C; Sun, 7 Jan 2024 15:05:25 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Tom Herbert <tom=40herbertland.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, 6man <ipv6@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S36R+5dMx=eUXrV4ofqzGMXujrYaFqWhFOAk5HJP300p4Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFU7BATiUtHmtbhtrWSPDR4c2Eb+XQXFdvU2-V=TVLGb+W6hnA@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S34CWX_1imdUtK1EHcVUEMfhWPm8Uj+JRHiqxMUz5fvH5Q@mail.gmail.com> <BL0PR05MB5316352E89869C176CCF6F50AE652@BL0PR05MB5316.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CALx6S37iKMXJ6hiqGvfDk6OtkDWsctGb2t-0GwGtciHxV4-thg@mail.gmail.com> <BL0PR05MB53165DBB635661F9D9B22B66AE652@BL0PR05MB5316.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CALx6S36R+5dMx=eUXrV4ofqzGMXujrYaFqWhFOAk5HJP300p4Q@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 28.2
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2024 15:05:25 -0500
Message-ID: <6343.1704657925@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/XTBzMnEUOFUdhBoDX8b7e4H2uIw>
Subject: Re: [IPv6] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-6man-comp-rtg-hdr
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Sun, 07 Jan 2024 20:05:31 -0000

Tom Herbert <tom=40herbertland.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
    > On Sat, Jan 6, 2024, 12:57 PM Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net> wrote:

    >> Tom,
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Revealing the ultimate destination address to intermediate nodes has never
    >> been an explicitly stated requirement of the IPv6 Routing header.
    >> Therefore, it is beyond the scope of the current experiment.
    >>
    > Ron,

    > It may not be an explicit protocol requirement, but as I pointed out it may
    > be an implicit operational requirement at least in some networks. Even if
    > there's not a solution in this draft, I think it's worth mentioning in the
    > draft the loss of visibility of the final destination and potential
    > ramifications.

My understanding is that the IPv6 dstaddr is updated by routing headers, and
the CRH is no different than other kinds, just smaller.  So if one samples at
a consistent point in the network, one will see all traffic in a given flow
having the same destination address. (It might not be the final destination!)

The problem is that different sampling points might see the same traffic with
different destinations.
(I'm not disagreeing with anything, just asking for clarity)




--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email