Re: [mpls] Available IP version numbers.

Kireeti Kompella <kireeti.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 06 October 2021 22:00 UTC

Return-Path: <kireeti.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C03733A0967 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 15:00:56 -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 O8UX8yxEBot3 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 15:00:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pj1-x1035.google.com (mail-pj1-x1035.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1035]) (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 3FF5C3A0964 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 15:00:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pj1-x1035.google.com with SMTP id k23so3302101pji.0 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Wed, 06 Oct 2021 15:00:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=tdE2iLgE35X1x2FhKPDFW5bW163tHtH7cOfgLlj/6Ec=; b=DwG+9LjmH9TJXF8wfQTM15D+uA2U8sfQapcrarqU3uy5I7sbIEtXun00shJqkvKM8J CqayE15l/4fKJHmokMUBELvS9jDqX9Fm5vGYyuMQB+YVvRRV600Qu1McGo/WtlsnwTSL OQEQoojq0klD+2HbW3jBKlQnyKxddQWxH3+V65o6jjapHyh4n1aJy6ttNmxeaKBB0E68 fJuuKmmgc9wCqiuahOW3PESPrHKv8X5/Xg5tRvNCQGcQJQsmd7TNKk6hRcZdH7P+wRHv MisfkBnije9xVRr16GpxYMg9G+2F/ViOWSiVyLYZgDCq34xjV0tbOXsMa1KSnT2MbELt okSg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=tdE2iLgE35X1x2FhKPDFW5bW163tHtH7cOfgLlj/6Ec=; b=lRxgLV2hqAqeimZy3luCjWc7Ch2dFAJhJ8t2vSMu8uw14IP5x1WHTb8ZzhJlqNiZt7 0AL6zp4SQ3c5n0cFHWc7rY6Rf9VefAyu70UUv1YIB0e3a0rRSBvRvZvHHh9fp4lxC3bn 160ghJ8IFE+yRhA1ZY7knqMq2K4/Cp4lFCC5zhr1EcwLrerJCZC7qAOVYYWYVl+PTavb +k1ST6TBMTM9FAV5o+TE5Ls2t5cj0M++bOkXaNAf7A6jJV2+BZkg1tNgl97Cfhh1NDiV sCSJmf3Vn6i9tIz640DzAmK1DWcmnoiINRc94K/I+2VG6sG2ceKmTu1xCOD3z/awtZSo YFLg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531ngY64ejKoAS7aDLaDR04+CO5W1lir0hpr81hTDzcyMm/OiZnW rvqxr4oS/P2DPFC+ihbVaNo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy8TdI/AKBxMcTwF284Fdu7tY3Zp+LYFAL32MI+StZAcjtGtkCzM8O5kBp6ES3phwzRvwlHWA==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:3802:: with SMTP id mq2mr632666pjb.213.1633557650580; Wed, 06 Oct 2021 15:00:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (172-125-79-142.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net. [172.125.79.142]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k13sm12507518pfc.197.2021.10.06.15.00.49 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 06 Oct 2021 15:00:50 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.120.0.1.13\))
From: Kireeti Kompella <kireeti.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <003701d7354d$4810e660$d832b320$@sergey.dev>
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2021 15:00:48 -0700
Cc: Kireeti Kompella <kireeti.ietf@gmail.com>, Loa Andersson <loa.pi.nu@gmail.com>, mpls <mpls@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <FA1AB086-4C72-4D9A-A320-0F2D339A588E@gmail.com>
References: <A5C8DFA9-3601-4838-9461-727CC40507B1@gmail.com> <003701d7354d$4810e660$d832b320$@sergey.dev>
To: ietf@sergey.dev
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.120.0.1.13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/hvFBB1bZ5j_j3NKsV1KzltuH3Cs>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Available IP version numbers.
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2021 22:00:57 -0000

I’m with you, Sergey.  My answer is, we do not need to take anything (more) from the IP numbering space.

There is a complete non-functional hack in some MPLS implementations look at the first nibble after the label stack to “determine” whether the packet is IP, and if so, load balance on the (hopeful) IP fields found therein.  For this, they use the values 0x4 and 0x6 for IPv4 and IPv6 respectively.

We need to acknowledge the existence of this hack in the network, accommodate it, limit it, offer a new way forward, and thereby terminate this pseudo-relation between the IP version number space and the first nibble.  All set out in a draft a few of us are writing.

The piece of IP numbering that’s already taken — using 0x4 and 0x6 — well, not much one can do at this point, unless we’re willing to declare those implementations “non grata”.

:K

> On Apr 19, 2021, at 11:53, ietf@sergey.dev wrote:
> 
> Hi Loa,
> In an adjacent thread ("mpls open dt & the first nibble discussion") I raised a question about why do we even expect to take something from IP numbering. Would appreciate your feedback on this one.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mpls <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Loa Andersson
> Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2021 1:13 AM
> To: mpls <mpls@ietf.org>
> Subject: [mpls] Available IP version numbers.
> 
> DT,
> 
> We had a discussion on how many IP version numbers are available. 
> 
> It should be remembered that in IANA “Reserved” really means “Reserved, do not assign”. 
> 
> 0,1,5,7,8,9 and 15 are reserved. 
> 2,3,10,11,12,13 and 14 are unassigned
> 4 and 6 are assigned 
> 
> To make the reserved requires a standard track RFC. 
> 
> So we 7 IP version numbers available, that is a sufficient low number to make me nervous, if I owned the registry. 
> 
> I would nit count on having more IP version numbers assigned to “us”, especially since we already have an agreement (PWE3), accepting to get two numbers and committing to not use more. 
> 
> /Loa
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls