答复: Adoption Call for "The IPv6 Compact Routing Header (CRH)"

qinfengwei <qinfengwei@chinamobile.com> Thu, 28 May 2020 10:57 UTC

Return-Path: <qinfengwei@chinamobile.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 A33953A0D4E for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 May 2020 03:57:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 yRfg4iramEQw for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 May 2020 03:56:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmccmta2.chinamobile.com (cmccmta2.chinamobile.com [221.176.66.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1B893A0D4D for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 May 2020 03:56:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from spf.mail.chinamobile.com (unknown[172.16.121.9]) by rmmx-syy-dmz-app08-12008 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee85ecf98f54ab-14e5a; Thu, 28 May 2020 18:56:53 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee85ecf98f54ab-14e5a
X-RM-TagInfo: emlType=0
X-RM-SPAM-FLAG: 00000000
Received: from cmccPC (unknown[117.136.38.152]) by rmsmtp-syy-appsvr05-12005 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee55ecf98f4936-bac19; Thu, 28 May 2020 18:56:53 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee55ecf98f4936-bac19
From: "qinfengwei" <qinfengwei@chinamobile.com>
To: "'Bob Hinden'" <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, "IPv6 List" <ipv6@ietf.org>
References: <19D30186-B180-4F65-BF00-7AD07CEF3925@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <19D30186-B180-4F65-BF00-7AD07CEF3925@gmail.com>
Subject: =?gb2312?B?tPC4tDogQWRvcHRpb24gQ2FsbCBmb3IgIlRoZSBJUHY2IENvbXBhYw==?= =?gb2312?B?dCBSb3V0aW5nIEhlYWRlciAoQ1JIKSI=?=
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 18:56:53 +0800
Message-ID: <001d01d634de$b317bdf0$194739d0$@com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AQHWKwY/H+hpxh+xuEKXCTJR6XsWxKi9ZsAw
Content-Language: zh-cn
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/bJ61lPx56e-hcXZoxgdWwQxymXs>
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: Thu, 28 May 2020 10:57:01 -0000

Hi,

I do not support the adoption of this draft this moment.
There are too many issues required resolved. 
First is that CRH is a mapping table based solution, which means in a
large-scale multi-domain interconnect, like MPLS, the CRH suffers from the
large label stack and protection/ convergence challenges.
Second is that CRH and SRv6 are incompatible, which affects the existed
network deployment. 
Third is the security considerations are really not clear, meanwhile it is
very important for a operator.
The most important one is there are couple of similar solutions that need
discuss together.




Thanks,
Fengwei Qin


-----邮件原件-----
发件人: ipv6 [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Bob Hinden
发送时间: 2020年5月16日 06:14
收件人: IPv6 List
抄送: Bob Hinden
主题: Adoption Call for "The IPv6 Compact Routing Header (CRH)"

This message starts a two-week 6MAN call on adopting:

 Title:          The IPv6 Compact Routing Header (CRH)
 Authors:        R. Bonica, Y. Kamite, T. Niwa, A. Alston, L. Jalil
 File Name:      draft-bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr-21
 Document date:  2020-05-14

 https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr

as a working group item. Substantive comments regarding adopting this
document should be directed to the mailing list.  Editorial suggestions can
be sent to the authors.

Please note that this is an adoption call, it is not a w.g. last call for
advancement, adoption means that it will become a w.g. draft.  As the
working group document, the w.g. will decide how the document should change
going forward.

This adoption call will end on 29 May 2020.

The chairs note there has been a lot of discussions on the list about this
draft.   After discussing with our area directors, we think it is
appropriate to start a working group adoption call.  The authors have been
active in resolving issues raised on the list.

Could those who are willing to work on this document, either as
contributors, authors or reviewers please notify the list.   That gives us
an indication of the energy level in the working group
to work on this.

Regards,
Bob and Ole