IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Proposal for changing how IPv6 Hop-by-Hop Options are processed

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Mon, 07 December 2020 08:38 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.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 302983A0E39 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 00:38:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 riJAmRsyIToo for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 00:38:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fgont.go6lab.si (fgont.go6lab.si [91.239.96.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06C203A116F for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 00:38:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.5] (unknown [190.179.27.231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fgont.go6lab.si (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 396F2280497; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 08:28:42 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: Proposal for changing how IPv6 Hop-by-Hop Options are processed
To: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>, Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>, Haoyu Song <haoyu.song@futurewei.com>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
References: <160703668657.9405.8891046478566468162@ietfa.amsl.com> <C573A554-9221-49C2-94AB-E552F1BA69E4@gmail.com> <8360e9919d46478cb471ccbafe923c7a@huawei.com> <DM6PR13MB27623A5EEB29F8294C3291C89AF10@DM6PR13MB2762.namprd13.prod.outlook.com> <a6c1a352-5f31-3c4b-9b75-50a64f82c925@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <CALx6S37zOXx5T=3wACpiif91dGnpykUEcpX9DhQ9cH2zD_jGFQ@mail.gmail.com> <DM6PR05MB6348F883A7D6076685001E90AEF10@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <753bd02e-4824-0067-9a42-9b2b3de629f9@gont.com.ar> <DM6PR05MB634853D862977C930D25CDD6AECF0@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CABNhwV1vqM2H4nRn7OJ3iPM-qSEKpnkFHysQscSCEK_k20XDZQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Message-ID: <27d1c64b-31d1-cf34-7da3-4c7348fa049b@si6networks.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2020 03:34:43 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABNhwV1vqM2H4nRn7OJ3iPM-qSEKpnkFHysQscSCEK_k20XDZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/fUD6VUQm8tQZPbF-asU-Vej3vBY>
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: Mon, 07 Dec 2020 08:38:52 -0000

On 6/12/20 21:16, Gyan Mishra wrote:
> 
> I think the draft should state how limiting the number of options 
> translates into forwarding rate improvement in the fast path versus punt 
> to slow path.

+1

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email