IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Pce] Clarification regarding draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6-11/RFC8664

Mrinmoy Das <mrinmoy.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 07 February 2022 10:18 UTC

Return-Path: <mrinmoy.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 654E13A0CC4 for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Feb 2022 02:18:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.496
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.496 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_SBL=0.5, URIBL_SBL_A=0.1] autolearn=no 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 FtLMQoj8o9r3 for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Feb 2022 02:18:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ed1-x532.google.com (mail-ed1-x532.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::532]) (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 E19843A0CCC for <pce@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Feb 2022 02:18:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ed1-x532.google.com with SMTP id cn6so6211836edb.5 for <pce@ietf.org>; Mon, 07 Feb 2022 02:18:18 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=iicR4CobZs+Ci6cTmZsQrYEwI+71uUtx4bzqPZoqXsE=; b=HTHK647rMJRAmb/uYbaVBXiLx95kE5fnlF5hLTxbNJ5716a8lms2xNo8fK+jTrCqHE k9+22LE3RvgMliLBwN0DAS7Of1BgpW6kDDPUV2v2Uz6ty5ikzXxv1Oq57TEJRUXvqnTn MessOZL/ErTbDGIF2Qp3Z77tf9sYRx/zg7uLdYPrgEWhRn82jv3Vzi9d1b4I3hsWw0BB vF53X2wRG0joJGkFwWXL82mLMxXnQ6GZ8qh/ewdQkP0t9wNcExX+KoTFqtG16yIr9WH7 HYtjvfoH24MyGeI1ju4M09LBE/hxtrg3zD7f5FdQ5SRGWkmSsbEl4OYnf0UP0MqPAvlc uriQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=iicR4CobZs+Ci6cTmZsQrYEwI+71uUtx4bzqPZoqXsE=; b=KcbObVte+HoSoon0ZVIWCQdY89LMYvL7gkcsN125YUYFAOzqjdk5jIhug0ZjWGxoPL PX09uZlQ3xAdcHWP0erXKpbzN1SE99EXUbLyKnKXoVDJr7vRvOirkqDVQqNQTJsSgY0k buEQJ9rD0bRdpduyR8NjmFPabaKNGRmcQdPvFx0tgzreKQgl6r3Dd68xh0RfNpMI5IU4 BZr9AsZWuquzTktF/aGsM984f9CLlhRoM8wsovEaICRq0C4DDpW6Hf767beq6O6s05Ry JDALT5aWEL+m21mawRNTCz9tM3sVXhxDex1UVv+KdKZZg6Ph21wM6WY74e3aE55MdsP3 emTg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530GxADzjQJm9Q3i2OF89HZVDpVd+6Ba5czPOt2LQCD2rsqpHO45 wd3KMRgCv0Z4Kspu2fW0G+4LliTeVi+rMfp0GiC8F/L5DaYyOzVv
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyHodPb+0wgad60CEIwnaYny6/G0oreu4MZ8g4/KTlumHIZIqdERQBNKDOYTOvCx7jY6y1jkQyTwUSkNxAudW4=
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:dc47:: with SMTP id g7mr1050555edu.280.1644229095785; Mon, 07 Feb 2022 02:18:15 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CANVfNKok8jD3M7N_Ug7rdDJ9N+eUz0_BuVOhaKbzC+juiSm91Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAP7zK5ayEYSidU+-jW=UoaFsE_-FqmU_bTWjgKwgt_0PtMWuUg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAP7zK5ayEYSidU+-jW=UoaFsE_-FqmU_bTWjgKwgt_0PtMWuUg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mrinmoy Das <mrinmoy.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2022 15:48:04 +0530
Message-ID: <CANVfNKo9G_SvLTJWK5LZ-GC9KwGPjtFo4-4=pnGnUgM2f7a+qg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dhruv Dhody <dd@dhruvdhody.com>
Cc: pce@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002f142805d76aeb17"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/15AKavBNhd1OMxcp3iurKEz94lc>
Subject: Re: [Pce] Clarification regarding draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6-11/RFC8664
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Path Computation Element <pce.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pce/>
List-Post: <mailto:pce@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2022 10:18:24 -0000

Thanks Dhruv for the information.

On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 4:08 PM Dhruv Dhody <dd@dhruvdhody.com> wrote:

> Hi Mrinmoy,
>
> You are correct. There was a recent errata on RFC 8664 regarding this
> issue - https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6753
>
> The authors of draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6 should also fix this
> issue in their draft. Thanks for noticing it.
>
> Thanks!
> Dhruv
>
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 4:01 PM Mrinmoy Das <mrinmoy.ietf@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello Team,
>>
>> I have a doubt regarding below section of the above draft:
>>
>> 4.3.1 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6-11#section-4.3.1>.  SRv6-ERO Subobject
>>
>>
>> NAI Type (NT): Indicates the type and format of the NAI contained in
>>    the object body, if any is present.  If the F bit is set to zero (see
>>    below) then the NT field has no meaning and MUST be ignored by the
>>    receiver.  This document reuses NT types defined in [RFC8664 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8664>]:
>>
>> It seems above highlighted line indicates that if F bit is set to 0 then
>> NT field MUST be ignored
>>
>> by the receiver, whereas it should be completely opposite as per below definition of F bit
>>
>> from the same draft:
>>
>>
>>   F: When this bit is set to 1, the NAI value in the subobject body
>>       is absent.  The F bit MUST be set to 1 if NT=0, and otherwise MUST
>>       be set to zero.  The S and F bits MUST NOT both be set to 1.
>>
>>
>> So, I think the above highlighted line needs correction. As NT type
>> refers to RFC8664, I found
>>
>> the same mistakes over there as well.
>>
>> 4.3.1 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8664#section-4.3.1>.  SR-ERO Subobject
>>
>> NAI Type (NT):  Indicates the type and format of the NAI contained in
>>       the object body, if any is present.  If the F bit is set to zero
>>       (see below), then the NT field has no meaning and MUST be ignored
>>       by the receiver.  This document describes the following NT values:
>>
>> Please let me know if you think differently.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mrinmoy
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pce mailing list
>> Pce@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
>>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email