Re: CRH and RH0
Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> Wed, 13 May 2020 17:29 UTC
Return-Path: <bob.hinden@gmail.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 3557C3A0CF0 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 May 2020 10:29:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 lQEjoZCGxqWf for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 May 2020 10:29:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x631.google.com (mail-pl1-x631.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::631]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 707F73A0C79 for <6man@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 May 2020 10:29:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x631.google.com with SMTP id u22so91561plq.12 for <6man@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 May 2020 10:29:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=0pDfeC9Q0zt8oBIZ7TUcJZoMiHN3gv1oXsyD3sIKnKE=; b=RjBCsph3Y49BjoHNl/ZHQse/oSNEzp4CnHL39QU7k7anU4VSK24UaN8pnbEZ+vhVol V5sY02sA3rRAPVZXpAIF/l5T4Xg4H2CzFDSnLZIQvM0Ss1yfh6pYT2sNAr9YIqlJLu3V WpyRXGMKBppbA/xZTH2IUJOEZSdGMQ1M2x2uQPEQ0OQvt6l89oBT4iuE341hOdwlXB7a 4qKOJBqRbq/buWuFKdgXMhrsKntWXJusPFVwYsMw3u/p5dzA9+uYktZ7UvXAKf9ao2Kf jwhfuOnVQLFe1ABgR5MMk271VHeuYljJNRdE9NcZIgSRIyBht1iCtx3PNkOQnvK6ViQn KITg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=0pDfeC9Q0zt8oBIZ7TUcJZoMiHN3gv1oXsyD3sIKnKE=; b=JyrYnZ208d5kWJFLKBgLh72lAq8T290vv6Wb9TSr6Lzd6kJex9SeHv5GbyWnBnctFD exemjoiMtk8KkvaPOPiTO42XWnmQcCAErrrpKDqS92+2tx3xQv39/TDcrV4pLCo3M0AK JMTrXvQfPGPvsR6JYF4BcSKhv8EQBOsRiYBj5s1a82ZQCpsjpkWNfugBKjbTt13pUbXA gG8BaVtPCEg1uhTiMyYTHws6EKwhJrDC3WxcYisZPQfb0+n+/Tvrq44OmEKY/a8Mxkhk ItK2gdVeDntMYxzjqWOaXPH7ayaqo21J8OvcE7Tmlsg0lRMSpqlbi9CwiiJYaPahpMyv De+w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530091mMcs1PkyAUCnnKKk5n8YF05WNWGD51Y4obNskj7BVy4vxi BQVZAaNHVYNvzDv/NML4rn5zhrVz
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJykwnlpnbaz1cVcxqGeHG2DbKn242Y15jdE0wmUwvaNehSD6gEsyvGR94ZLyJYc1JKR/GfHZA==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:9e8:: with SMTP id 95mr4433603pjo.189.1589390970825; Wed, 13 May 2020 10:29:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:5a00:ef0b:a8ee:1611:4a33:248? ([2601:647:5a00:ef0b:a8ee:1611:4a33:248]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a23sm130226pfo.145.2020.05.13.10.29.29 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 13 May 2020 10:29:30 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <6CDA7DC3-081B-4AB3-AD96-027540B4D4B7@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_0F9E755F-2B2B-450D-95E5-82BE4BA327B1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.14\))
Subject: Re: CRH and RH0
Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 10:29:28 -0700
In-Reply-To: <4CDC2EA7-6817-40F9-B973-3777D159DAE2@cisco.com>
Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>, 6man <6man@ietf.org>
To: "Darren Dukes (ddukes)" <ddukes=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
References: <4EDFE9A2-A69C-4434-BB0A-960C2453250F@cisco.com> <DM6PR05MB6348FE6E3A45320C2A47EB66AEBE0@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <8068EBE1-38DD-411E-A896-EB79084BBCC4@cisco.com> <DM6PR05MB6348326B0F72A009DB4F7746AEBE0@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <942AF8C7-079E-4C81-95AB-F07A182E8F19@employees.org> <DM6PR05MB63483621F4AD3DEACA6FAF35AEBE0@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <4CDC2EA7-6817-40F9-B973-3777D159DAE2@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.14)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/kzEp_L1vUvnbqUpbEVmalZpl2jI>
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: Wed, 13 May 2020 17:29:34 -0000
Hi, > On May 13, 2020, at 10:16 AM, Darren Dukes (ddukes) <ddukes=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > > Hi Ron, > > I'm still trying to figure out where you're going with this. > First it was SRm6, then an RH0 replacement, then not an RH0 replacement (in the 6man meeting), then it sort of is... > > So I'm hoping you'll update the draft so I can understand a bit more: > - CRH has nothing to do with RH0. > - CRH operates only within a limited domain. I think these are reasonable suggestions. I also think only having one size would be helpful. Bob > > Anything else to clarify from others comments would help too. > > Thanks > Darren > >> On May 12, 2020, at 5:36 PM, Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net> wrote: >> >> Ole, Darren, >> >> The CRH is a general purpose Routing header that operates inside of a network domain. In the sense that it is a general purpose routing header, it replaces RH0. In the sense that it is restricted to a network domain, it does not replace RH0. >> >> If adding these two sentences will cause you to support the draft, or at least not object to it, I will happily add them! >> >> Are these the only objections? >> >> Ron >> >> >> >> Juniper Business Use Only >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: otroan@employees.org <otroan@employees.org> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 4:38 PM >> To: Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net> >> Cc: Darren Dukes (ddukes) <ddukes@cisco.com>; 6man <6man@ietf.org> >> Subject: Re: CRH and RH0 >> >> [External Email. Be cautious of content] >> >> >> Hi Ron, >> >> >>> The answer to your question is a bit nuanced. My goals were to build a general purpose routing header that overcomes the RH0's limitations. Those being: >>> >>> - Its size >>> - Its security issues >>> >>> Now, is that a replacement for RH0? In one way, yes. RH0 and CRH are both general purpose routing headers. In another sense, no. RH0 is meant to traverse network boundaries. But RFC 5095 taught us that letting routing header traverse network boundaries might not be a wonderful idea. So, CRH is restricted to a network domain. >> >> If CRH could be a RH0 replacement, you would have to show how the tag distribution mechanism would work across the Internet? >> RH0 was supported in every IPv6 node, given the requirement for a tag->IPv6 address (or is it forwarding method) mapping, I can't quite see how that would be done in a general enough fashion for CRH? >> >> I don't think RFC5095 taught us that source routing cannot be done across the Internet. >> In fact I don't see how the CRH draft prevents the RFC5095 attack to happen inside of the CRH limited domain. >> Just send a packet with a list of tag#0, tag#1, tag#0, tag#1 and you have the same amplification attack. >> >>> And now I return to my original question. When engineering students read the CRH RFC in 25 years, will they really care what my motivation was? Why should we burden them with this detail? >> >> To the contrary. Take the motivations and intentions behind IPv6. We have spent thousands of emails trying to decode what the original intensions with EHs and their limitations were, why the minimum MTU was 1280, recently I saw a thread about the reasons for why TTL/HL and protocol/next header was swapped between v4 and v6. If your protocol is successful, the original napkin it was designed on will become legend. ;-) >> >> Best regards, >> Ole > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > ipv6@ietf.org > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > --------------------------------------------------------------------
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Erik Kline
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Brian E Carpenter
- CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: CRH and RH0 Bob Hinden
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 otroan
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 otroan
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 otroan
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Bob Hinden
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)
- Re: CRH and RH0 Tom Herbert
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Stewart Bryant
- Re: CRH and RH0 Bob Hinden
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Tom Herbert
- Re: CRH and RH0 Ole Troan
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Bob Hinden
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- Re: CRH and RH0 otroan
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: CRH and RH0 Tom Herbert
- Re: CRH and RH0 Erik Kline
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH and… John Scudder
- Re: CRH and RH0 Mark Smith
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Robert Raszuk
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Gyan Mishra
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… S Moonesamy
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… John Scudder
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Bob Hinden
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Bob Hinden
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… S Moonesamy
- Re: CRH and RH0 Tom Herbert
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Chengli (Cheng Li)
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Chengli (Cheng Li)
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- Re: CRH and RH0 Stewart Bryant
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- Re: CRH and RH0 Stewart Bryant
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Voyer, Daniel
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… 刘毅松
- 答复: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… qinfengwei
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Zafar Ali (zali)
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Andrew Alston
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Tom Herbert
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Ron Bonica
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Nick Hilliard
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: [spring] Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was… Robert Raszuk
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… John Scudder
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Fernando Gont
- Shorter SIDs in SR over IPv6 (Re: Adoption call c… Greg Mirsky
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… John Scudder
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Tom Herbert
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Robert Raszuk
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Mark Smith
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Tom Herbert
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Robert Raszuk
- Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Nick Hilliard
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Nick Hilliard
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Wang, Weibin (NSB - CN/Shanghai)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Andrew Alston
- Re: Size of CR in CRH otroan
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Uma Chunduri
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Ole Troan
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Mark Smith
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Fred Baker
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- On adddress sizing (was: Re: Size of CR in CRH) Toerless Eckert
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Toerless Eckert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Chengli (Cheng Li)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Nick Hilliard
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Zafar Ali (zali)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril)
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Gyan Mishra
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Gyan Mishra
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Wang, Weibin (NSB - CN/Shanghai)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)