Re: 6man w.g. last call for <draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam>

["Joel M. Halpern" <[e-mail]>]

Sorry, minor typo.  SRH, not NSH, in the 4th paragraph.
Joel

On 12/5/2019 9:42 PM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
> The normative behavior for the bits in various places says that the 
> packet is punted to the control process.  In and of itself, that is fine.
> 
> However, in order for that to be useful, the control process has to know 
> what to do with the packet when it gets there.  In the classic case of 
> router redirect, this is coupled with definition of various content to 
> be processed by the router control logic.
> 
> In the case of this document, there is no normative definition of what 
> the control process is to do with the packet.  And particularly since in 
> many of the cases described the packet that is punted still has an SRH, 
> normal packet processing would simply reach the same "punt" step.  With 
> nowhere to punt it.
> 
> You asssume in the examples that some forms of parsing that bypass the 
> NSH will take place.  But processing does not take place by instinct or 
> magic.  It takes place because we write RFCs that describe what has to 
> happen.  Without some definition of the required parsing, and I believe 
> (although I am guessing due to the lack of description) we also need 
> some normative description of what the control process is required to do.
> 
> Note that in most OAM, we define the behavior that is required, and then 
> indicate where it is permitted to use the control plane to achieve it. 
> This results in a clear specification, and implementation flexibility.
> 
> Yours,
> Joel
> 
> On 12/5/2019 9:34 PM, Zafar Ali (zali) wrote:
>> Hi Joel,
>>
>> I did not understand your comment.
>>
>> Can you please point to specific text in the draft for which the draft 
>> needs to define normative behavior for the "node punt processor look 
>> past the SRH and make determinations based on the content."?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Regards … Zafar
>>
>> *From: *ipv6 <[e-mail]> on behalf of "Joel M. Halpern" 
>> <[e-mail]>
>> *Date: *Wednesday, December 4, 2019 at 4:37 PM
>> *To: *Ole Troan <[e-mail]>, 6man WG <[e-mail]>, 
>> SPRING WG <[e-mail]>
>> *Subject: *Re: 6man w.g. last call for <draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam>
>>
>> I re-read this draft, and I am afraid it is currently under-specified.
>>
>> In order for the various examples to work, there is assumed behavior by
>>
>> the processor to which packets are punted.  I could not find where this
>>
>> normative behavior is described explicitly.  It appears that the
>>
>> behavior requires that the node "punt processor" look past the SRH and
>>
>> make determinations based on the content.  This needs to be described
>>
>> explicitly.  And it needs some discussion of why it is legitimate to
>>
>> look past the SRH when the SRH does not show SL=0.
>>
>> Yours,
>>
>> Joel
>>
>> On 12/4/2019 3:53 PM, Ole Troan wrote:
>>
>>     Hello,
>>
>>          As agreed in the working group session in Singapore, this
>>     message starts a new two week 6MAN Working Group Last Call on 
>> advancing:
>>
>>          Title    : Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) in
>>     Segment Routing Networks with IPv6 Data plane (SRv6)
>>
>>          Author   : Z. Ali, C. Filsfils, S. Matsushima, D. Voyer, M. Chen
>>
>>          Filename : draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam-02
>>
>>          Pages    : 23
>>
>>          Date     : 2019-11-20
>>
>>     https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam/
>>
>>     as a Proposed Standard.
>>
>>     Substantive comments and statements of support for publishing this
>>     document should be directed to the mailing list.
>>
>>     Editorial suggestions can be sent to the author. This last call will
>>     end on the 18th of December 2019.
>>
>>     To improve document quality and ensure that bugs are caught as early
>>     as possible, we would require at least
>>
>>     two reviewers to do a complete review of the document.  Please let
>>     the chairs know if you are willing to be a reviewer.
>>
>>     The last call will be forwarded to the spring working group, with
>>     discussion directed to the ipv6 list.
>>
>>     Thanks,
>>
>>     Bob & Ole, 6man co-chairs
>>
>>     --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>     IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>>
>>     [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>
>>     Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>>
>>     --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>>
>> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>
>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> [e-mail]
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------