IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: I-D Action: draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion-02.txt

Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> Mon, 04 December 2017 21:28 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 B6DC812896F for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Dec 2017 13:28:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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 vb6C2wF4-zJT for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Dec 2017 13:28:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf0-x230.google.com (mail-pf0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::230]) (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 6C61C1270FC for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Dec 2017 13:28:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf0-x230.google.com with SMTP id j124so9531297pfc.2 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 04 Dec 2017 13:28:57 -0800 (PST)
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=WbcCWMnIRNc4J555WFk2tm2HdbUWvgSsrFn/m1R9Kt0=; b=oxvc1BiKV+PK9sdmb6i1cj+s2U+RQs+khyEpwS5THxuyyjV8ANItfX5C0YndxhHkc4 j+1uG2N9a+5CpQ9fIOsDynuO2dE6MoAfho3qOl/OpHjtSUv75ViuY9Bvh9gx4ZMHxA1N HUg7L781QeHZAdKkhCYiRnxXINrmpnNA8AFqigTOP+DvR7GRfB9jcipDW2AdwzbNocJ2 cdjerLxSEYRrvtPq7O2v2YVigjIHJDQ+cCRGQ7u69qwLjuJz89sD4dP/facpVFwKU8Jb PqXGHP1OVqTIUBJ2o2TGuj23Mc2RZTsjkrJwvuCeFSxLVqdMTPi/rvUisASBWc7zWkOt k7bQ==
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=WbcCWMnIRNc4J555WFk2tm2HdbUWvgSsrFn/m1R9Kt0=; b=fxutwe4maEXUK2bjQTvyopBmQB30oIqluKR9wbjwKnRSDVbqE0WMRLW4XZY68jOkDi yogjTA5xL1xRMwnhVX6h1LShUl7KHFijmCVSbdyblrbHQPH5oGsNPawPYHUE01885v+3 Mas5KD1Mv4zPaLUeHSMZnB0EP8Cjz8SGC88FKsMwnNE95twCvDN8/1cJrxKaadUD58jM haLga/r7or9ZHodxHfqqFe4nFvwnIJpJZyCOjU8s64P5snnxDROKiwg+d+cOBgi3uUn0 tTnCb08w9ubO5bKAZX6MWj/GlZwdJ2VTic8WGRLSZwMwINMszciM5L13J2Gv8nilueEB Fh6A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX4R9IcQb1quuOvlq8Quwc9nXZvPq7AmVEYuS4JL+phe9fER7tMT AgTm+0MZ+Bfm7F6zN2iDm1I=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMY782NFkPRVYrJI0WpCiGekw8PBBMeKMFIwTqEHYL8EZYtvMt3egwef5DUsWIIt5qjRguqWBA==
X-Received: by 10.84.193.3 with SMTP id e3mr15766710pld.300.1512422936996; Mon, 04 Dec 2017 13:28:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.16.224.219] ([209.97.127.34]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c4sm11270625pgn.93.2017.12.04.13.28.55 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 04 Dec 2017 13:28:55 -0800 (PST)
From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <DACF635E-0A59-4894-85C8-F4C891379A3F@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C2CCB62B-172A-475F-B36C-9E9201D3117A"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion-02.txt
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2017 13:28:54 -0800
In-Reply-To: <1cf221bc-e2e3-bc04-6559-d01eff2e1232@gmail.com>
Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>
To: Brian Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
References: <151120281628.21912.1099097760493570225@ietfa.amsl.com> <f4425076-2f76-5713-2819-9d26671d56bb@si6networks.com> <4E92F160-C586-4C7B-BAEF-97C204856A8A@employees.org> <bc9d7f57-8687-7f85-8ac3-49751683232b@si6networks.com> <CA+b+ERnKbRXgFycgKd7EXMVvS1Mu_RTC5tfPbNE781TDZ49rYA@mail.gmail.com> <CAO42Z2wWSucKNouo0RxNf7pmyPErNk1bVny43qTLY6E333mpcQ@mail.gmail.com> <e41ee3ae-05ef-0a1a-505e-968323b07625@gmail.com> <CAO42Z2x2-WFyxYKpcwtm_z4WiFFf1M5oiW2=j6fXnqgUG1F8DQ@mail.gmail.com> <8ecf3590-5313-551e-fbb3-f95aada87a67@uniroma2.it> <CALx6S35e0krDCLUhUQFws_gSJhtv0m_E_KQkyRQQWO=zL_=vnQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+b+ERki3bfmt0FarOdNGbVbdU1U99Sucu3NhEZ9q1BnNxUQrw@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S34fSBycO+1pU8x3konO+6=s9sYWQQaFp36kcHi4HdyxFQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+b+ERmF2rj4n9mfvG+ANdNjpBXgpMJb63SqSNVQif4cvwaTPQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S34rvUig5T36cygkq4=rN2yNEBPUHGULDFEefA46WgCkbw@mail.gmail.com> <CA+b+ERmJ8L-j0arbFhR+nvmPNNWYe5OJ3Pab1bu1Y-2HVfJtYw@mail.gmail.com> <1cf221bc-e2e3-bc04-6559-d01eff2e1232@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/nv4Uv0ODBSaX92Cca0Ml65CUHbg>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 04 Dec 2017 21:28:59 -0000

> On Dec 2, 2017, at 2:15 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On 03/12/2017 08:53, Robert Raszuk wrote:
>>> 
>>> Right, the idea is that at each node the input flow label and dst map
>>> to an output flow label. All the flow label tables are constructed to
>>> provide give loop free forwarding and multipath selection.
>> 
>> 
>> ​That's essentially SR-MPLS :) ​
> 
> If you look at the early history of the flow label, which predated MPLS,
> this isn't a big surprise. (IPng-ologists also remember CATNIP,
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1707.)
> 
>> 
>> SRH would be unneeded in this solution.
>> 
>> 
>> ​True - but I was just counting in general node's forwarding capabilites​.
>> 
>> ​I think the less moving parts we standardize the better :)
> 
> It's true, but the flow label is already in every packet, albeit
> with different semantics.
> 

I will add that swapping flow labels as I think Tom Herbert was proposing has much less side effects than inserting and processing extension headers.

Bob

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email