RE: Size of CR in CRH
Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net> Tue, 19 May 2020 18:02 UTC
Return-Path: <rbonica@juniper.net>
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 C713D3A1016 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 May 2020 11:02:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=juniper.net header.b=BTEA7s13; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=juniper.net header.b=Qvg2wuai
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 IHd5pYX3Wjpz for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 May 2020 11:01:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com [208.84.65.16]) (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 3E8423A1012 for <6man@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 May 2020 11:01:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108157.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 04JI1kJ7022033; Tue, 19 May 2020 11:01:47 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=ayOKmfc+1tfyhZsrhUOlPeTIHYDdS0ujqgPnwkypdx8=; b=BTEA7s13sFSC4toWkLR1woyt5NabIa+o4CmR2yDT4jCfi2nxylpkzir1Jh23DAJ7cnYu mdy/veqM+fQtAGVLwWkJTgU1CxXMjfuUDYsWw5wUPx9NoSzW4WGGW6x5pfsjQoOfmDFy MFj15oUk/YinZqny4K3afvjY2anvcgc/5WSIe/uAFtxEQCdX4GHjTffGxVZ74yw6aLzs v2C5QWc7UB7GPgamNEwYLbR6+NPPh5/9VKtX8TXAvkuhZCs3yMtKe+azTM3O/w659Ifd w5Q+vrzyrFvKLD5ImUhQdgbZ2SLTdPNF53zbugmOsyF7Ckz4r8YG2M7EXHabXt8XSaSi nQ==
Received: from nam10-mw2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-mw2nam10lp2101.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.55.101]) by mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 312fep5d9j-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 19 May 2020 11:01:47 -0700
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=HCZAzg5fOu1gDbwjO3nw19lssJY3LPcFyqaSRu1qsQhWz0hmZZcEaNO/8Xf1AcQWtZb84foNY6/uuTIf8EYeyx4q0z7EtCVP/Oj3H2hSXnnuvYKKnwQONVzUMXW314DTb2nAZVdpjd/h13BfpxmQmefNnzy3eh/DmPJcYPlzyoFMLp3JTdfIDwW8FDiVjTt+7ZSvTb6rwa4KMcoINorTpFuGBszS78nRLphME9t9/lDhol6s839EoggwYNVb7NBFM5+k/mhzcTqfXG3++D+v5yqKxvjAwHslBWttzalq5Td1zvIZWVb95n5yyiw/YRueNX9Mk8rCfv6hZsqp/Z6wDQ==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=ayOKmfc+1tfyhZsrhUOlPeTIHYDdS0ujqgPnwkypdx8=; b=gyjPyYb49Ywb0W3XsWdmWN+MTmbnCvSYBWfSdtmiDJxt7qj9yHsr6RwMzL5PkTyhECktmAG9gpUjjD3UAZNpxbOK9S6bv34g9S5AXEFj8Cg+b/QoIOhdm+SGqBhqxDLOjfV32Bed91ux7eFUuS/f28s+sKZpFinEU61hF/ScUBjSU3SZwZqnzyzuTaQZIKTfDlBPqfD9K8xIzC7RXlk1R4tYvt7eM4v4WyFi8iOJwsrKiXFBj/L9cWs1g1R9G+C7iAA7Iw4JfCerMJ748PVpiC8ztIN9yhdMkpn0dvFQefZtNbkuwwNwbXzMIcf7Q+zQDN2GvNzc6rOazHgrMletbw==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=juniper.net; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=juniper.net; dkim=pass header.d=juniper.net; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=ayOKmfc+1tfyhZsrhUOlPeTIHYDdS0ujqgPnwkypdx8=; b=Qvg2wuaiB6OfCge/ccEeb19sm9hKgJt4pURnG4tYp4qhpZ1drq+mBcLD58UsLUKWvMmLb0QRq7oiiwB8iaeT8gxH6+veeugppF4extiUJ2j2xN1cY8VOQ/gXhy6W4TpNNfay1o8gnXHm3HOIX+FUhdKS9CRvoBFvjwCsiscaeOs=
Received: from DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:122::15) by DM6PR05MB5371.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:5b::11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3021.11; Tue, 19 May 2020 18:01:44 +0000
Received: from DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::c020:3bf5:7230:75e3]) by DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::c020:3bf5:7230:75e3%4]) with mapi id 15.20.3021.019; Tue, 19 May 2020 18:01:44 +0000
From: Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>
To: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
CC: 6man <6man@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Size of CR in CRH
Thread-Topic: Size of CR in CRH
Thread-Index: AQHWLWlMmVgzEcPv3Eu/d+FFW+C5c6ivpq+AgAABkEA=
Date: Tue, 19 May 2020 18:01:44 +0000
Message-ID: <DM6PR05MB6348945F596A016E6F11856EAEB90@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
References: <DM6PR05MB6348E9AD1E088792C2F10BB4AEBF0@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <8CC3F837-B4D6-4570-AF2F-37041839F391@employees.org> <21E9A957-1A31-4A11-8E78-5F7E382866D4@juniper.net> <CAOj+MMEONA5OtWz9Y7pTt4WyVsb+7-_wEKPVryyHLncHG6ew6g@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S35fPrnh6UtpPYmQ6Yew6D2QVMvYTdp0AaGr8jYhGNKk3A@mail.gmail.com> <CAOj+MMH0Q6ASmjPdmgNB2LHDhvCL2u2DLB9SBRLnJnCD3EbA4w@mail.gmail.com> <CAO42Z2wke4Lw44zdE0G9CJq3rXh69jsxjO5=RTcCv9EXdNOp5A@mail.gmail.com> <BC6A6354-BAB5-4CE0-ABEB-73B4C88E149A@gmail.com> <a8220864-302a-3698-c61d-abb7926482fa@foobar.org>
In-Reply-To: <a8220864-302a-3698-c61d-abb7926482fa@foobar.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
msip_labels: MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_Enabled=true; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_SetDate=2020-05-19T18:01:41Z; 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=3d3030de-e460-498c-a154-38f7b474e1f7; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_ContentBits=2
dlp-product: dlpe-windows
dlp-version: 11.4.0.45
dlp-reaction: no-action
authentication-results: foobar.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;foobar.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=juniper.net;
x-originating-ip: [108.28.233.91]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 447008fa-94f7-4995-2455-08d7fc1eb13a
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM6PR05MB5371:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM6PR05MB5371B10BA31C0C670883B2F8AEB90@DM6PR05MB5371.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 040866B734
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: KgJwVvdzlDAB2+EdmDxMsPTWvzXkzHclcP/s9o8QxcH2n+VPZsIL0rkKPUHHbUKmkmk0RZv+cfJ+7BKxc/uENcgycsHwEBmpQwgF9R22PEI3DK6TRZTrQAYlchMs+lMlqH9LjC7Ulgy00I7MN5srsrTro2iC9SOYiJ57tQhS3reRpSJANEohGyyHNFkiam6fpuMHwKVgwGCoZjxnmQwUUgxW/Bf59qt33HFG4Y3YaCoH0Wp9nJ30wlbi9pwa1vLDSb9R9vZWe9pZ3Z8MLkoS+N5avvKJ2MpHMZ5QLfyREG4ynOt4TCkLo95mADwkj+Cf8Uwjg2djFYA79CM7vQAt2fInmcj+xgRCdiGyt2t1CTUyU5+Nd5tiJQ5xtpYaTLCVnzIOKPjqD6S5UzhTbxqX+w==
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(4636009)(366004)(376002)(346002)(396003)(136003)(39860400002)(478600001)(33656002)(52536014)(71200400001)(9686003)(966005)(86362001)(186003)(4326008)(66574014)(110136005)(8936002)(6506007)(53546011)(66946007)(76116006)(316002)(8676002)(2906002)(26005)(5660300002)(66476007)(66556008)(64756008)(66446008)(7696005)(55016002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: OMRAUSMADtFjO7ztScSN345YxIx/hJP5CoJ6t83CvgZf4cIk/Vk38SnDotuZfQyt5By3dFmMhEuf24Q3fyonMju+8PhG+4PniqH8ZqOsN8GL3GwJQVTZ4qXxYWGI4oy79Ur3rW+kBew05y0MU31gnJ+Bymxw/VD29wbAfLkPVybPQvI2ZEHLzH/6VurlU/9l5NdSPhgMCfDxyrb/k+UyxIS8s/txAJLxdUs+I5eDpVWKAgW50I9LOt9jjA537iIpEHpY90MjpmNXNd1m81yqPSpQ/X+fWMBkpNYsyQoidBv7xtuAzOWuQU0vBbUlW886AbDmnVGFsjJoqJQvmAMiN96DDH259Ho0v1PCrpL1aM5lOiutEifQDDSgdmLKsFpV4WzmZr7R+UTecXFzFsLFYHD7nJo0NuOUu0Pph/DJ2jXAVIAjXtzm43AdXueC9UrLs4N1PRVFoUdzmL9wYHsbMp3Hg0pcVnHtcj3Sy3yFo0M=
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 447008fa-94f7-4995-2455-08d7fc1eb13a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 19 May 2020 18:01:44.8071 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: EPaA/1kmFh2/LSl7rmg4pHQAjsLSk0cBzYHld2XeL+dzca5vOxvOE6j+kX47Oaqx4ryJkshG29uIKoDFZkHtiQ==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR05MB5371
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.216, 18.0.676 definitions=2020-05-19_06:2020-05-19, 2020-05-19 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 lowpriorityscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 mlxscore=0 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 clxscore=1011 impostorscore=0 malwarescore=0 cotscore=-2147483648 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2004280000 definitions=main-2005190153
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/LmIV8jmR1LqJuO-t29yIMIX_y0k>
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: Tue, 19 May 2020 18:02:01 -0000
Hi Nick, Bob and Fred The following factors figured into the decision to specify 2 Routing types, one with a 16-bit identifier and the other with a 32-bit identifier: - Today, very few networks contain more than 65,000 routers. So, most networks could obtain best compression with a 16-bit identifier. - When 5G is deployed, we may see networks that contain more than 65,000 Cell Site Routers. These networks will need an identifier that is wider than 16 bits. - It is unlikely that we will ever see a network that contains more than 4,000,000 routers. So, we will never need an identifier that is wider than 32 bits. If Routing header types were in short supply, and only one were available to us, we would have to do one of the following: - Select a single length (16, 24 or 32 bits) - Use the fifth byte of the Routing header to indicate the identifier length. The first option isn't very appealing. A 16-bit identifier is too short for some networks. A 24-bit identifier may be difficult for some ASICs to process. A 32-bit identifier gives suboptimal compression for all existing networks. The second option isn't very appealing either. If we use the fifth byte to indicate the identifier length, and we want the first identifier to begin on a 32-bit boundary, the next 24 bits would be wasted. Fortunately, Routing header types are not in short supply. The Routing Type registry has room for 255 entries. Since it was established 25 years ago, only 6 types have been allocated. Of those, two have been deprecated (RH0 and Nimrod) and two are for special use (Experiment 1 and Experiment 2). So, allocating two Routing types may be the best solution. Ron Juniper Business Use Only -----Original Message----- From: ipv6 <ipv6-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Nick Hilliard Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2020 1:13 PM To: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> Cc: 6man <6man@ietf.org> Subject: Re: Size of CR in CRH [External Email. Be cautious of content] Bob Hinden wrote on 19/05/2020 00:08: > I also prefer a single size (and only one SR header definition). If > it’s 16-bits, that would allow 64K routers in one CRH domain assuming > it needs to uniquely identify each router, if there is more than 64K > routers, then it only needs to identify the routers that are serving > as hops in the source route. > > As you note 24 bits is better, but may not align as well. Or then > 32-bits. Having multiple options for SID size increases complexity at several levels: hardware programming, CLI, network compatibility, troubleshooting, etc. What happens if a network wants to change from using one type of SID to another because of whatever reason? Does a node need to be configured with multiple IDs? Can you mix and match? These sorts of things matter when you run networks. You're increasing the complexity of some aspects by a factor of two. Simplicity is a huge gain from an operational point of view. 32 bits has the advantage of being the same size as a node's bgp or ospf router-id. This would be something ranging from helpful to important if the device has an option for manual programming. The EH packet header lookup size of a device obviously impacts this. Nick -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!UCWrvkvflbEehBiEIA8M4PHGA_mrvC0MLpZly-euihAg3_3aSjRJLLRAZuRumqRr$ --------------------------------------------------------------------
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Erik Kline
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Brian E Carpenter
- CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: CRH and RH0 Bob Hinden
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 otroan
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 otroan
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 otroan
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Bob Hinden
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)
- Re: CRH and RH0 Tom Herbert
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Stewart Bryant
- Re: CRH and RH0 Bob Hinden
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Tom Herbert
- Re: CRH and RH0 Ole Troan
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Bob Hinden
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- Re: CRH and RH0 otroan
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: CRH and RH0 Tom Herbert
- Re: CRH and RH0 Erik Kline
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH and… John Scudder
- Re: CRH and RH0 Mark Smith
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Robert Raszuk
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Gyan Mishra
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… S Moonesamy
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… John Scudder
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Bob Hinden
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Bob Hinden
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… S Moonesamy
- Re: CRH and RH0 Tom Herbert
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Chengli (Cheng Li)
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Chengli (Cheng Li)
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- Re: CRH and RH0 Stewart Bryant
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- Re: CRH and RH0 Stewart Bryant
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Voyer, Daniel
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… 刘毅松
- 答复: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… qinfengwei
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Zafar Ali (zali)
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Andrew Alston
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Tom Herbert
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Ron Bonica
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Nick Hilliard
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: [spring] Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was… Robert Raszuk
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… John Scudder
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Fernando Gont
- Shorter SIDs in SR over IPv6 (Re: Adoption call c… Greg Mirsky
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… John Scudder
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Tom Herbert
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Robert Raszuk
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Mark Smith
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Tom Herbert
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Robert Raszuk
- Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Nick Hilliard
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Nick Hilliard
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Wang, Weibin (NSB - CN/Shanghai)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Andrew Alston
- Re: Size of CR in CRH otroan
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Uma Chunduri
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Ole Troan
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Mark Smith
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Fred Baker
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- On adddress sizing (was: Re: Size of CR in CRH) Toerless Eckert
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Toerless Eckert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Chengli (Cheng Li)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Nick Hilliard
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Zafar Ali (zali)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril)
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Gyan Mishra
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Gyan Mishra
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Wang, Weibin (NSB - CN/Shanghai)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)