Re: [Isis-wg] draft-previdi-filsfils-isis-segment-routing

[Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]>]

One additional point .. As just hinted offline by Sam when I said MTU I
assumed it is equal to MRU. If not we should discuss both values and it's
consequences on the packet size in this sort of source based segment chain
selection.

Cheers,
R.


On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Stefano,
>
> As we have discussed in the past I like the proposal a lot. Control plane
> encoding seems fine as well.
>
> My slight concern is however related to data plane. As you recall even
> with label stack of 2 we have had number of issues when deploying L3VPNs
> with MTU. The draft is very silent on the issue of potential MTU problems -
> I would suggest new section to at least recommend some MTU handling (pMTU
> for example) before applying this technique.
>
> Likewise one could easily extend your signalling to add MTU on the links
> to make sure that while going via all segments data plane packets will
> "fit". Such extensions would in fact have more use cases, but I will let
> you discover them :)
>
> Also the empty section of IPv6 header encoding is a bit surprising yet
> quite an interesting in the light of potential multiple v6 headers and MTU
> issues.
>
> Cheers,
> R.
>
>
>