RE: Header Insertion and TI-FA

[Ron Bonica <[e-mail]>]

Gyan,

If TI-LFA needs a 6in6 encapsulation anyway, why go through the extra pain of normalizing header insertion for the special case where the PLR is a segment endpoint?

                                                                                      Ron




Juniper Business Use Only
From: Gyan Mishra <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 9:36 AM
To: Ron Bonica <[e-mail]>
Cc: 6man <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Header Insertion and TI-FA

[External Email. Be cautious of content]


Hi Ron

I was thinking the same this past weekend as well.

So at the PLR node which could be any transit P router in the core.  So to create that bypass transit path FRR link and node protection Next Next hop (NNH) path around the  failed node or link, an EH header is inserted in flight on the PLR node to the merge point PQ node for the bypass flow 50ms failover.

So the agreement we came up with end of last year with Spring, is to add a 6in6 encapsulation along with EH insertion of the type 4 SRH header at the PLR node to the merge point PQ node to be in compliance with RFC 8200.  The additional encapsulation would in essence appear like the SRv6 source node performing the encapsulation.

I looked in the PGM and SRH draft but I could not find the verbiage of the update to add to additional 6in6 encapsulatio

So how would the packet look now?

IPv6 6in6 encapsulation- SR source node
EH SRH type 4 inserted (steering packet PGM)
IPv6 6in6 encapsulation - PLR node
EH SRH type 4 inserted ( steer to merge point PQ node)
Payload

At the merge point PQ node the EH SRH header is removed.

Packet is now steered via the original SRH header inserted at the SRv6 source node to the PSP node.

PSP pseudocode
SL== 1 ;  SL = SL -1 ; decrement pointer
Remove EH SRH header

Forward packet to USP egress PE end node.

USP egress PE endpoint SL=O

USD - remove 6in6 encapsulation
Send packet to IPv6 routing engine L3 vpn
End.x function processing


Spring - Please provide section within PGM that has the verbiage of the 6in6 encapsulation at the PLR node.

Thanks

Gyan

On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 8:57 AM Ron Bonica <rbonica=[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Folks,

Happy Monday!

As I was painting this weekend, I remembered that the use-case for IPv6 Header insertion is TI-LFA. This made the following questions come to mind:


  *   How does TI-LFA work when the original packet already contains a routing header? Will it insert a second, so that the packet has two routing headers?
  *   How does TI-LFA work when the node directly upstream of the link (i.e., the PLR) is not a segment endpoint? Will it insert an routing header? Is that consistent with 8200?

                                                                                                                        Ron




Juniper Business Use Only
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!VCe2LOAZEHCCva900dxo71Vh9AfYqiSYViBZFO2MQS1wcWunfq6LTcc_ZqyBKxU2$>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Gyan  Mishra
Network Engineering & Technology
Verizon
Silver Spring, MD 20904
Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>