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

"Templin (US), Fred L" <> Thu, 28 May 2020 19:56 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 968483A0B0D for <>; Thu, 28 May 2020 12:56:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VCuPyrPqacZf for <>; Thu, 28 May 2020 12:56:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C948F3A0B06 for <>; Thu, 28 May 2020 12:56:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (8.15.2/8.15.2/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id 04SJuRE3000795; Thu, 28 May 2020 15:56:33 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=boeing-s1912; t=1590695793; bh=0+wBoZE3/3MfN6QdGff010FIT9MTNdl1EsZOWa75yko=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=mlcmSftdp+Q3jrAHAuhwb1KtILoR2Qb7MQFOXe3BF3MR/C9FN7wBY3Scv0H5pU1Qg h/U1wESWJK9R5CF7BPw5tHzVqd03Zq7PwwHf+zpLzC26rhL1Vn8G/4M+fHmG2TBjoA PjV5UZ3bUnqU+vIyT51B/v+omUimehvMtEfGnqbjepEe4ZZ9NaYGvjo+Bryu1r/ui+ EbJfrIIHG6/4ryiGrWzbbepHHdsRlg0dBClclW+yhPcfYDdBZ+GOAJMxZyKgwIkYym 5Z6E7XoVmTcaL2MaJVUYxijrOggDS0EnZFxEg38BmEdCu4qCwilxpoeE1kEELw7b0r aE0IZZMrNqgpQ==
Received: from ( []) by (8.15.2/8.15.2/8.15.2/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTPS id 04SJuIjb031605 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK) for <>; Thu, 28 May 2020 15:56:18 -0400
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.1.1979.3; Thu, 28 May 2020 12:56:17 -0700
Received: from ([fe80::e065:4e77:ac47:d9a8]) by ([fe80::e065:4e77:ac47:d9a8%2]) with mapi id 15.01.1979.003; Thu, 28 May 2020 12:56:17 -0700
From: "Templin (US), Fred L" <>
To: IPv6 List <>
Subject: RE: Adoption Call for "The IPv6 Compact Routing Header (CRH)"
Thread-Topic: Adoption Call for "The IPv6 Compact Routing Header (CRH)"
Thread-Index: AQHWNR5XYdjeS4DU7kubkMY4XJBQoai95gnw
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 19:56:17 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <defcf5c6292345e7a333d600c4f47561@M10-HQ-ML02.hq.cnc.intra> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
x-tm-snts-smtp: CE6FBD45C310902AA1E39E45E1115707CDF635AAF9981ADBF971F45CEB16A78E2000:8
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_729356f6279549fb8f1b52f5d9791c7eboeingcom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
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: Thu, 28 May 2020 19:56:37 -0000

People have asked about the OMNI and AERO drafts, and these are now updated

to show the application of Segment Routing in general and CRH in particular:

The latter draft in particular cites CRH. The entire section on segment routing should

be of general interest, but below is the current section text on CRH:

Thanks - Fred

3.2.9.  Segment Routing Header Compression

   In the Segment Routing use cases discussed above, the segment routing
   headers must be kept to a minimum size since source and target
   Clients may be located behind low-end wireless links (e.g., 1Mbps or
   less).  The Compressed Routing Header (CRH)
   [I-D.bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr] provides a compact form that reduces
   the header size by omitting information that can already be derived
   by intermediate Bridges.  The CRH Helper
   option[I-D.bonica-6man-crh-helper-opt] can be used to encode the AERO
   Route Optimization TLV, and the final hop Bridge that performs route
   optimization may remove the CRH and its helper before encapsulating
   and forwarding to the target Client.

   The CRH and its companion helper option are therefore seen as
   critical architectural elements that should be quickly progressed
   through the standards process.  Implementations SHOULD use the CRH
   and its companion helper option instead of other Routing Header types

   whenever possible to conserve bandwidth.