Re: [spring] CRH is back to the SPRING Use-Case - Re: Size of CR in CRH

Andrew Alston <> Mon, 25 May 2020 16:44 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46AF03A0E7A for <>; Mon, 25 May 2020 09:44:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TUDbitJuyvQ4 for <>; Mon, 25 May 2020 09:44:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56B043A0E4B for <>; Mon, 25 May 2020 09:44:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (Using TLS) by with ESMTP id uk-mta-11-4jBgHVTsMRm9F0XTlgzChg-1; Mon, 25 May 2020 17:42:34 +0100
X-MC-Unique: 4jBgHVTsMRm9F0XTlgzChg-1
Received: from (2603:10a6:803:bf::31) by (2603:10a6:803:2a::13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3021.23; Mon, 25 May 2020 16:42:33 +0000
Received: from ([fe80::ed68:9303:79e0:cc49]) by ([fe80::ed68:9303:79e0:cc49%4]) with mapi id 15.20.3021.029; Mon, 25 May 2020 16:42:33 +0000
From: Andrew Alston <>
To: Ron Bonica <>, "" <>, Sander Steffann <>
CC: "" <>, "" <>, 6man <>, "Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)" <>, Robert Raszuk <>
Subject: Re: [spring] CRH is back to the SPRING Use-Case - Re: Size of CR in CRH
Thread-Topic: [spring] CRH is back to the SPRING Use-Case - Re: Size of CR in CRH
Thread-Index: AQHWL+bxyj79qihlmkifgq52uZ/V4qizc7SAgAAFfICAAArkgIAADaEAgACbDACAAo+aAIABbhYAgABgjoCAAA6ZAIAABcIAgABY94CAAEEkAA==
Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 16:42:32 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-GB
msip_labels: MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_Enabled=true; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_SetDate=2020-05-25T15:49:17Z; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_Method=Standard; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_Name=0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_SiteId=bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_ActionId=daccb660-ea56-4ae0-9fd1-d414ac36e87e; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_ContentBits=2
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.36.20041300
x-originating-ip: []
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 05f9165e-6a61-42f6-914d-08d800ca9f75
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: VI1PR03MB3552:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:8273;
x-forefront-prvs: 0414DF926F
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: iMzptUEZlQ5Diy8MhrLVJ4aQ54/xr+Sn8ZLWddkCoqH8mFfCtOgxmuDiP6D3Q4OSX27mF2tPy5Rvy6s+ejiuaLbYN8bJXIEw9osWHpxa3NTjSIWzP8NukmAJhM1wkwa4BunwkoMX7cBtxTKnKSQDymr0nU6JFYhF0S6El5G3K1UGE0R1jaORbBByP0e+qmHmtBz/LmE3lU3f3ocXi/7vkLmKsFC+5ZSki4A4QG9IFFzZGTGPGMJUPmUPlTfP85vUIg/lsB1BVJW68XEp/Fkcd2v9zBSLJCJ+4fqrviIzodkIdlLk0Ps3fu76NbicP/8lVAkSKpzHFSvPU9wKUKY3PZ8VNMKEtw5XFyfmqgGLPqCAAOc+NMfpI8114EASWLrpIDtDX+uReOflD5G4qL6Xnw==
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM;; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(4636009)(376002)(39860400002)(136003)(396003)(366004)(346002)(5660300002)(8676002)(91956017)(2616005)(76116006)(66556008)(66476007)(66946007)(66446008)(64756008)(33656002)(4326008)(166002)(110136005)(8936002)(71200400001)(478600001)(36756003)(53546011)(2906002)(6486002)(54906003)(86362001)(186003)(6506007)(966005)(316002)(6512007)(26005); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 05f9165e-6a61-42f6-914d-08d800ca9f75
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 25 May 2020 16:42:33.0301 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 68792612-0f0e-46cb-b16a-fcb82fd80cb1
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: zx/0OGXmihtgyjHCPlpxoFOd7b0aFBIJ3cmLTneor1khu9c4TaHX13NRNu3ajYMYqsLJLQS9xne/NhfurvjkofItoAx3MQJ7+3pZ5l/l3Pc=
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: VI1PR03MB3552
X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_FC46B202D8584DE0B5C0445497CF7BEEliquidtelecomcom_"
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 16:44:10 -0000

I think a better question would be – not if hats are on or off – but which hat – the employee of a vendor hat?  The WG chair hat? The CoC hat? The “In personal capacity” hat?

Like Ron and others – I’m kinda curious here


From: spring <> on behalf of Ron Bonica <>
Date: Monday, 25 May 2020 at 18:51
To: "" <>rg>, Sander Steffann <>
Cc: "" <>rg>, "" <>rg>, 6man <>rg>, "Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)" <>om>, Robert Raszuk <>
Subject: Re: [spring] CRH is back to the SPRING Use-Case - Re: Size of CR in CRH


When commenting on list, could you indicate whether hats are on or off?


Juniper Business Use Only

-----Original Message-----
From: <>
Sent: Monday, May 25, 2020 6:31 AM
To: Sander Steffann <>
Cc: Robert Raszuk <>et>; Ron Bonica <>et>;; 6man <>rg>;; Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) <>
Subject: Re: [spring] CRH is back to the SPRING Use-Case - Re: Size of CR in CRH

[External Email. Be cautious of content]


>> Your below list looks like custom made set of RFP requirements to eliminate any other vendor or any other solution to solve the problem at hand rather then rational list of requirements.
> My main customer (an ISP in NL) would fit exactly in the list that Ron sent. They want a simple solution that they can understand and manage, that works over IPv6. Whether the path will include many nodes (>8) is not known at this point, but they want something that can support it in the future.
> So the list of requirements isn't that strange.

That CRH is simple is a bit like claiming that MPLS is simple just because the header has few fields.
I think you would be hard pressed to substantiate that any solution here is particularly simpler than any other. But you are welcome to try.

Everyone claims to want a simple solution, funnily enough the end result is usually the opposite. The words "simple" and "source routing" are oxymorons.
Let's leave the marketing out of this.


spring mailing list<>