Re: FW: New Version Notification for draft-bonica-6man-ext-hdr-update-00.txt

On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 6:48 PM Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 8, 2020 at 9:49 PM Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Ron
> >
> > I agree this is a much needed update to RFC 8200 to tighten up the
> verbiage.  I agree with Tom’s comments on the draft.
> >
> > In Tom’s comment about destination versus final destination that is
> important clarity as far as hop by hop steering with SID copied to DA, you
> don’t want the hop by hop DA copied during SRH processing to be confused
> with final destination node.  As far final destination in the SR use case
> it would be a closed domain being the SP operators core.  However the
> customer payload tunneled through the operator domain would actually
> terminate outside the Operators domain within the customer network and
> could also have an RH that should also follow the RFC 8200 rules as to
> final destination of the packet within the customer network.
> >
> > I think the main use case is for operators and SR but since this is the
> IPv6 specification we are updating it should account for all final
> destination use cases for RH processing and what is allowed and what is
> forbidden.
>
> RFC8200 already uses the "final destination" terminology in several
> instances, including this interesting statement that does clarify the
> correlation between Destination address and final destination in the
> presence of a Routing header at least for fragmentation:
>
> "If a Routing header is present, the Destination Address of concern is
> that of the final destination."

    Good!  I am good with that verbiage.  Thank you for verifying!

>
>
> Tom
> >
> > Kind regards
> >
> > Gyan
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 7:36 PM Ron Bonica <rbonica=
> 40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Tom,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the review. Comments inline.....
> >>
> >>                                 Ron
> >>
> >>
> >> Juniper Business Use Only
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
> >> Sent: Friday, March 6, 2020 6:25 PM
> >> To: Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>
> >> Cc: 6man@ietf.org
> >> Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for
> draft-bonica-6man-ext-hdr-update-00.txt
> >>
> >> Ron,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the draft!
> >>
> >> I suggest to define the term "final destination" as opposed to just
> "destination" out of an abundance of clarity. Note that the Destination
> address isn't necessarily the address of the final destination, and
> similarly Destination Options (before the routing
> >> header) may be processed by nodes other than the final destination.
> >>
> >> [RB] Fair enough. Maybe final destination or ultimate destination.
> >>
> >>
> >> I don't understand why this particular requirement is needed:
> >> "However, if the packet does not include a Fragment header, the
> Authentication header and Encapsulating Security Payload header can be
> processed by any segment egress node, including the destination node."
> >>
> >> My interpretation of the intent of RFC8200 is that:
> >> - All nodes in the path can process Hop-by-hop options
> >> - Segment egress nodes can process Hop-by-hop options, Destination
> Options before routing header, and the Routing header (that is unless the
> segment egress node is also the final destination it does not process any
> of the packet beyond the routing header)
> >> - Final destinations process all packet headers
> >>
> >> [RB] You are correct. I will fix this right away.
> >>
> >> "Process" here does not include inserting or deleting extension
> headers. It may include modifications that are done on fields explicitly
> declared to be mutable.
> >>
> >> [RB] Yes. I will clarify that.
> >>
> >> Tom
> >>
> >> On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 2:45 PM Ron Bonica <rbonica=
> 40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Please review and comment.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Juniper Business Use Only
> >> >
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org <internet-drafts@ietf.org>
> >> > Sent: Friday, March 6, 2020 5:41 PM
> >> > To: Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>
> >> > Subject: New Version Notification for
> >> > draft-bonica-6man-ext-hdr-update-00.txt
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > A new version of I-D, draft-bonica-6man-ext-hdr-update-00.txt
> >> > has been successfully submitted by Ron Bonica and posted to the IETF
> repository.
> >> >
> >> > Name:           draft-bonica-6man-ext-hdr-update
> >> > Revision:       00
> >> > Title:          Inserting, Processing And Deleting IPv6 Extension
> Headers
> >> > Document date:  2020-03-06
> >> > Group:          Individual Submission
> >> > Pages:          5
> >> > URL:
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bonica-6man-ext-hdr-update-00.txt__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!U5D_phraIxAwKqMrWDSa87_at2DUci9QUmKtH1rE42HmEbybR6X9Wsq15vGrEd2Y$
> >> > Status:
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bonica-6man-ext-hdr-update/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!U5D_phraIxAwKqMrWDSa87_at2DUci9QUmKtH1rE42HmEbybR6X9Wsq15hjd1VtT$
> >> > Htmlized:
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bonica-6man-ext-hdr-update-00__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!U5D_phraIxAwKqMrWDSa87_at2DUci9QUmKtH1rE42HmEbybR6X9Wsq15vJvzWAw$
> >> > Htmlized:
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-bonica-6man-ext-hdr-update__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!U5D_phraIxAwKqMrWDSa87_at2DUci9QUmKtH1rE42HmEbybR6X9Wsq15mbBPBWx$
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Abstract:
> >> >    This document provides guidance regarding the processing, insertion
> >> >    and deletion of IPv6 extension headers.  It updates RFC 8200.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
> submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at
> tools.ietf.org.
> >> >
> >> > The IETF Secretariat
> >> >
> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> >> > ipv6@ietf.org
> >> > Administrative Requests:
> >> >
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> >> > __;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!U5D_phraIxAwKqMrWDSa87_at2DUci9QUmKtH1rE42HmEbybR6X9W
> >> > sq15imVyTZZ$
> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> >> ipv6@ietf.org
> >> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > --
> >
> > Gyan  Mishra
> >
> > Network Engineering & Technology
> >
> > Verizon
> >
> > Silver Spring, MD 20904
> >
> > Phone: 301 502-1347
> >
> > Email: gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com
> >
> >
> >
>
-- 

Gyan  Mishra

Network Engineering & Technology

Verizon

Silver Spring, MD 20904

Phone: 301 502-1347

Email: gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com