Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SIDs (draft-ietf-spring-srv6-srh-compression)
Francois Clad <fclad.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 04 April 2024 11:50 UTC
Return-Path: <fclad.ietf@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 B739DC14CF1B; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 04:50:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.094
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.094 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, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 HHXW5kiVqzE5; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 04:49:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x230.google.com (mail-lj1-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::230]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 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 CD984C14F683; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 04:49:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x230.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2d82713f473so15332561fa.3; Thu, 04 Apr 2024 04:49:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1712231397; x=1712836197; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=M7A5CBei/nWkDnCNWu4sr1kyqOE5KrwmPaFmwE590N8=; b=F+Sxr+XRem5xh8nVZov5bc37I+xy9KYVbUpV3eQmgMbhzzLgAautZ4qU+Ue0S0GL+i GLvsxd3lvvZwy7aDlpzB+o9+ixt+Yn1VuM/aKogW3P274IB/P7iv2pA2tw1KH8gwOd+6 iQrYnkK9sr+P283gBtovRm5LILhZSkCCJSa6P/3lEwIKSos1c4ZKQlEW0lQNqK8Ood0o PAGVEBDIClWaiOi8nCcoELGhdMcZJz/4PTcPZ5socMppruiWUb9vb2txu6zMIWFW9gFX ertb5iCewpgmY0m8FrnymHd18LlKPEse2L8z9WOgrL6Kfxv5XjYsBsoq59A8dj72wN/m sn4A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1712231397; x=1712836197; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=M7A5CBei/nWkDnCNWu4sr1kyqOE5KrwmPaFmwE590N8=; b=iPt6Hcy4Q6CVtVnI0kKGg7lOIQysOclADr7cL6/QnRCL6hRU7jvbppCLPsqSiBcCqr gNiP5lESzIi+woQ8Vf7rWQG/a2LUIhQ0hY/V4ezhoWSl7xL8VIqZUQWWz0DmRznEEHvu vNJ3mpRpxR5WBegGsJ3MWKEF9c9tkcBJmOYa1fBL1dfxaIJQ2EcaFxksAZCo2OPXIG9L ZLcQbs/sycoZyuyYmT+1I2pi8jIj+vQ9OkmI1zXBeEWbqBWmPybnZwGhP/XnTBlIwymn P3HrcaqYloJfmSouPQ3zmz0UpyIFBef40QrTvp9AAbpk+V6zC0NJijZMX2tXyftmMM89 KRhg==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUMpuB22lldskpqpecSvpT46maAXpQPtzT6r6Ej1t+MENtcCzhPJcLW3Lv9jiLygffoySIIH3osbnl6tfEGEmaDm6HFixRDbVBvOlzT6xO8Nr4PNiRJa4E=
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxtXsDDhg3raYlAmro7BkseBMrn/CXoHVW6gt9R6F0AV84AM0Tj GwtOvjdfQWgEZEyiwiCe0HCRSIFbBjwpVVkeiPv4d1rD5F/N4Tvj0SgmEGPa3ezoxcSGs1UsJnK VQD03hIioZkUpivHlK/mvACFDXw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGBAP5WFnSRS467Hua7vMmi9aLO1TooAvOPW8UWolV1OXwEaWsvxMcMKay5u/VobHGB85oAVvB9tB4AlVpw/kQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9c13:0:b0:2d4:94eb:e9fe with SMTP id s19-20020a2e9c13000000b002d494ebe9femr1722267lji.21.1712231397277; Thu, 04 Apr 2024 04:49:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 1064022179695 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 11:49:56 +0000
Received: from 1064022179695 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 07:49:53 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mimestream 1.2.6)
References: <CAMMESszUUdDw-xnDtZKqz75g6SXZ+7mXtZujBKwN+hxypC-Kuw@mail.gmail.com> <CAMMESswF_NnpK7_xk9OXmmocU8P7pne0gmPjCkapXEQVfQA2zQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMMESswF_NnpK7_xk9OXmmocU8P7pne0gmPjCkapXEQVfQA2zQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Francois Clad <fclad.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2024 11:49:56 +0000
Message-ID: <CAHT6gR--Qw7W0ZqyfdEupTpLAjeJ5OLTTjzM6NvQ87zdizgb8Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: 6man <ipv6@ietf.org>, "spring-chairs@ietf.org" <spring-chairs@ietf.org>, SPRING WG List <spring@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000354f3b061543f0d3"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/Y0RPbyReADV2lAEl7lbrW-CatZk>
Subject: Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SIDs (draft-ietf-spring-srv6-srh-compression)
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: Thu, 04 Apr 2024 11:50:03 -0000
Hi Alvaro, all, RFC 8754 allows the SR source node to omit the SRH when it contains redundant information with what is already carried in the base IPv6 header. Mandating its presence for C-SID does not resolve any problem because it will not provide any extra information to the nodes along the packet path. Specifically for the case of middleboxes attempting to verify the upper-layer checksum, - An SRv6-unaware middlebox will not be able to verify the upper-layer checksum of SRv6 packets in flight, regardless of whether an SRH is present or not. - An SRv6 and C-SID aware middlebox will be able to find the ultimate DA and verify the upper-layer checksum in flight, regardless of whether an SRH is present or not. Furthermore, transit nodes (e.g., middleboxes) should not attempt to identify SRv6 traffic based on the presence of the SRH, because they will miss a significant portion of it: all the best-effort or Flex-Algo traffic steered with a single segment may not include an SRH, even without C-SID. Instead, RFC 8402, 8754, and 8986 define identification rules based on the SRv6 SID block. Thanks, Francois On 2 Apr 2024 at 19:44:51, Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: > [Moving this conversation up on your mailbox. :-) ] > > [Thanks, Robert and Tom for your input!] > > > We want to hear from more of you, including the authors. Even if you > already expressed your opinion in a different thread, please chime in here. > > We will collect feedback until the end of this week. > > Thanks! > > Alvaro. > > On March 28, 2024 at 8:06:18 AM, Alvaro Retana (aretana.ietf@gmail.com) > wrote: > > > Focusing on the C-SID draft, some have suggested requiring the presence of > the SRH whenever C-SIDs are used. Please discuss whether that is the > desired behavior (or not) -- please be specific when debating the benefits > or consequences of either behavior. > > Please keep the related (but independent) discussion of requiring the SRH > whenever SRv6 is used separate. This larger topic may impact several > documents and is better handled in a different thread (with 6man and spring > included). > > Thanks! > > Alvaro > -- for spring-chairs > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > ipv6@ietf.org > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- >
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Tom Herbert
- [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SIDs (… Alvaro Retana
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Robert Raszuk
- [IPv6] Requiring Tunneling - subject change Joel Halpern
- Re: [IPv6] Requiring Tunneling - subject change Martin Vigoureux (Nokia)
- Re: [IPv6] Requiring Tunneling - subject change Bob Hinden
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Requiring Tunneling - subject change Robert Raszuk
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Alvaro Retana
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Francois Clad
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Mark Smith
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Francois Clad
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Francois Clad
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Ole Troan
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Michael Richardson
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Cheng Li
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Ole Trøan
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Michael Richardson
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Suresh Krishnan
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Francois Clad
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] [spring] Subject: Mandating SRH when u… Suresh Krishnan
- Re: [IPv6] [spring] Subject: Mandating SRH when u… Michael Richardson
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] [spring] Subject: Mandating SRH when u… Bob Hinden
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Tal Mizrahi
- Re: [IPv6] [spring] Subject: Mandating SRH when u… Antoine FRESSANCOURT
- Re: [IPv6] [spring] Subject: Mandating SRH when u… Tom Herbert
- Re: [IPv6] [spring] Subject: Mandating SRH when u… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [IPv6] Subject: Mandating SRH when using C-SI… Ketan Talaulikar
- Re: [IPv6] [spring] Subject: Mandating SRH when u… Mark Smith