a question about [draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header]
<liu.yao71@zte.com.cn> Wed, 04 December 2019 09:38 UTC
Return-Path: <liu.yao71@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 49622120119 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 01:38:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.198
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.198 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 DHA9pQBUF2zt for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 01:38:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxhk.zte.com.cn (mxhk.zte.com.cn [63.217.80.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5574B1200FD for <6man@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 01:38:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxct.zte.com.cn (unknown [192.168.164.217]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id C2ECB3F20540EC485EC7 for <6man@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 17:38:50 +0800 (CST)
Received: from mse-fl1.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.30.14.238]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id AB91C1213C68B7087E87 for <6man@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 17:38:50 +0800 (CST)
Received: from njxapp04.zte.com.cn ([10.41.132.203]) by mse-fl1.zte.com.cn with SMTP id xB49YThu021472 for <6man@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 17:34:29 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from liu.yao71@zte.com.cn)
Received: from mapi (njxapp02[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid203; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 17:34:29 +0800 (CST)
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2019 17:34:29 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2afa5de77da558f250e7
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <201912041734295108730@zte.com.cn>
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: liu.yao71@zte.com.cn
To: 6man@ietf.org
Subject: a question about [draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header]
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: mse-fl1.zte.com.cn xB49YThu021472
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/ZhXiDmzIwGAd4Zo8QAqCfotg-dM>
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: Wed, 04 Dec 2019 09:38:56 -0000
Hi All,
When reading the draft referenced in the subject line, there is a question really doubts me,and after searching the mail lists and rfcs such as 8200, I still can't figure it out .
Session 4.3.1.1 explains how to process an SRH when an SRv6-capable node receives an IPv6 packet and the corresponding FIB entry that represents a locally instantiated SRv6 SID.
S01. When an SRH is processed {
S02. If Segments Left is equal to zero {
S03. Proceed to process the next header in the packet,
whose type is identified by the Next Header field in
the Routing header.
S04. }
My question is ,if segment left is not equal to 0, can the node process the next header in the packet or not ? Or it's a product realization thing?
I wonder if this issue has been already discussed, if so, please please let me know where I can find it.
I look forward to hearing responses
Thanks
Liu Yao