Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Popping)

["Joel M. Halpern" <[e-mail]>]

The TI-LFA task can clearly be done with encapsulation.  That the 
proponents do not desire to do so is clear and understood.  Not desiring 
to do so is not a reason to violate a Full Standard RFC.

That is why I asked what the purpose was for header insertion.  And 
citing the TI-LFA draft does not answer the quesiton.

Yours,
Joel

On 12/6/2019 9:44 PM, Ole Troan wrote:
> Tom,
> 
> And you are familiar with the TILFA work for SR?
> 
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-01
> 
> Cheers
> Ole
> 
> 
>> On 7 Dec 2019, at 03:17, Tom Herbert <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 4:02 PM <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 3) Besides the technical arguments against EH insertion (which have been
>>>> codified in draft-smith-6man-in-flight-eh-insertion-harmful, I have
>>>> asked *lots* of times what's the technical motivation for doing EH
>>>> insertion. It boils down to "to save 40 bytes", which doesn't seem to me
>>>> as a compelling argument to violate the spec -- even less in a design
>>>> that employs 128-bit waypoints and is claimed to be operated in a
>>>> limited domain.
>>>
>>> You seem to be wrong. You must have missed the 6man header insertion 
>>> session in Singapore.
>>>
>>> Can you please watch:
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJU0m1EhjaI
>>> Starting at 26:20. Particularly 33:20. TILFA
>>>
>> Ole,
>>
>> I've watched the video. I don't see how #3 was addressed. I refer you
>> to 44:06 when Joel explicitly asked why header insertion is required.
>> Darren's answer was essentially that they want to have options and
>> that regardless of any discussion it's going to happen. No technical
>> explanation has been offered why extension header insertion is needed,
>> nor has any explanation been offered as to why the alternative of
>> encapsulation is insufficient to solve the problem. To quote Joel's
>> response: "The answer is you want it, that's not a good answer.''
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>> Ole
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> [e-mail]
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>