IETF Logo Mail Archive

[IPv6]Re: Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-deprecate-router-alert

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 11 June 2024 20:24 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@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 CD388C151545; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:24:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.109 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 X7C_3lRMqM67; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:24:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x42d.google.com (mail-pf1-x42d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42d]) (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 516B0C151531; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:24:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x42d.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-70432d3406bso2515497b3a.1; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:24:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1718137487; x=1718742287; darn=ietf.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ll8KorSiU4YSzyT5iPA2RPrcFSieJw9cBXuwcJUTAlU=; b=EVga8X89cJ9HM1GFxFOnm6yY93xlWtF/3CGIR+BRxz2Gu/3tWf3pnO5rTtVRqHzlSp gNaBZo3rhuzcR7WdvYwy5FTSq/n/hpGsCS1g/LUI2U0SJEv5OlH73I3tFQL8ml0qn5Hv 8ADWV7PaqvLJ/bQpDjW1e+tilpHADT6ytwwrhwkjeBbCKNERGG6GcTN3AeER+CB2v45v hxKecSFtLQffrNGMggn4JGS4bFKQeHQ4R5u3DCul277/lA+r96Drzb2PYhzQu3rpxX16 Nhjilm1R3i2Rt7aCASBeH6irxjAGoY+owSQKkvPB+ZxOnTgDgtxmSqv+AjbRetkiF3fQ 1bJQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1718137487; x=1718742287; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ll8KorSiU4YSzyT5iPA2RPrcFSieJw9cBXuwcJUTAlU=; b=QhTy/AKvYJhuP7R69ey6P15RLl8p3QS0Abogzn+nN8DIIDOUWGKYU9vHNa1aRPg8G/ +0IWffXp/qbU3f4IYjSZl2l7Ibau9xI1z8F6N/NXcmaIik2Yb5WQKvdWENWREKEPMhL+ /Gffazn0KG3LDk044g/XyuisS3+tmcwh8yKg6VIvhaMxabYxdmXSesGPkPW0SkuANQaN 97VahV6988Osa6UCkItVfEqiaeW6mwwMYX0QgNcUrzJYHoI5n0TWJZuhTKgZbu130ZSb lKSCinRSo60qKANQIKIWNG94OQiXCeJOhGl/zUlGOjQxJJCWidf1RwJJ3bofoUHvwk38 K2gg==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXDq0yQh4fkibZgp7kE7Wtc/Yr4Xi4/VmIpJpY+UHNUzo84Mc8hBLQOp+bdwIolOer8Eqp0UYo/De19o92t87D4y7sac3ScjDUnMeN/gwdqEhHQLYyXR0DFeXye7ijPajhmdIMa7EAPQiSVKMp5H/Yn
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzsrWrEqTz8z8+Kfcgz1lpEuQ3OFqR+ka8q6ILniOrvfH7Qx4xD K3AYT4E4DE5MhTqzVJSdSCuz431cecqiVKKVyNJC4X7wlw0DwjDbrh73UImz
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGfPtqhdw7WDrwuE6B5k+gDDNKR7XKWFU7RxIykzsu81qIAWYoR4i/TbDVkG9tHhlxUCmcPKw==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a21:819a:b0:1b8:94a0:4a65 with SMTP id adf61e73a8af0-1b8a9be9cf9mr52830637.36.1718137487451; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:24:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPV6:2404:4400:541d:a600:44b7:2c2e:2bc6:8707? ([2404:4400:541d:a600:44b7:2c2e:2bc6:8707]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d2e1a72fcca58-7045993dc73sm4547995b3a.7.2024.06.11.13.24.44 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:24:47 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <58364a98-cb84-48f0-8e7e-7b1064d48ac2@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 08:24:42 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
To: Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>, Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
References: <CAFU7BAQDP-+bOZOphnxwJopikYxoW=Bvo_1S7czfXmq=2UT2zg@mail.gmail.com> <D245AC57-7B9C-434C-A30C-6F9A6BEA7FC5@employees.org> <BL0PR05MB5316180BD5E4D4016D77DD04AEC72@BL0PR05MB5316.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BL0PR05MB5316180BD5E4D4016D77DD04AEC72@BL0PR05MB5316.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Message-ID-Hash: 6YID4IXS3Y4ZR5RSQQURZBOWX324PWLW
X-Message-ID-Hash: 6YID4IXS3Y4ZR5RSQQURZBOWX324PWLW
X-MailFrom: brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-ipv6.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: 6man Chairs <6man-chairs@ietf.org>, "draft-bonica-6man-deprecate-router-alert@ietf.org" <draft-bonica-6man-deprecate-router-alert@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [IPv6]Re: Adoption call for draft-bonica-6man-deprecate-router-alert
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group (6man)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/_MNIOpUp6S6phdFI8471FeH0kVs>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:ipv6-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:ipv6-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ipv6-leave@ietf.org>

Ron,

For my education:

<snip>

> - new work. What if there is a new protocol requiring a punt out of the forwarding path by an intermediate router? Isn’t HBH + Router Alert the easiest and most performant way for the forwarding plane to do that? Alternatively we’ll end up with magic cookies like STUN (0x2112A442). Where the forwarding plane would have to parse the EH chain before looking at a cookie.
> 
> [RB] Could you tell me more about such protocols. Specifically, why could they not use the same strategy that RSVP used when it moved away from the Router Alert Option.

Where do I find the spec for RSVP without Router Alert?

Thanks
     Brian

v2.27.8 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status