Re: RE: RE: New Version Notification for draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-02.txt

Hi, Nan, 

You can refer back to the following draft, and you can see that much work have been done with IPv6 for src/dst routing.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-baker-ipv6-isis-dst-src-routing-07
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-baker-rtgwg-src-dst-routing-use-cases-02
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-baker-ipv6-ospf-dst-src-routing-03

Best,
Shu 

> -----原始邮件-----
> 发件人: gengnan <gengnan@huawei.com>
> 发送时间:2024-03-05 11:20:37 (星期二)
> 收件人: 杨术 <yang.shu@szu.edu.cn>
> 抄送: "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>
> 主题: RE: RE: New Version Notification for draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-02.txt
> 
> > 2) Things will be much simpler in IPv6 scenario than IPv4.
> Can you explain it more?
> 
> Best,
> Nan
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: 杨术 <yang.shu=40szu.edu.cn@dmarc.ietf.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2024 1:50 AM
> > To: gengnan <gengnan@huawei.com>
> > Cc: 杨术 <yang.shu@szu.edu.cn>; rtgwg@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: RE: New Version Notification for
> > draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-02.txt
> > 
> > Hi, Nan,
> > 
> > Thanks for the comments.
> > 
> > Yes, we only consider IPv6 in our draft, because, 1) we only implement and
> > deploy the IPv6 version currently. 2) Things will be much simpler in IPv6
> > scenario than IPv4.
> > 
> > Best Regards,
> > 
> > Shu
> > 
> > 
> > > -----原始邮件-----
> > > 发件人: gengnan <gengnan=40huawei.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
> > > 发送时间:2024-03-03 18:31:55 (星期日)
> > > 收件人: 杨术 <yang.shu=40szu.edu.cn@dmarc.ietf.org>
> > > 抄送: "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>
> > > 主题: RE: New Version Notification for
> > > draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-02.txt
> > >
> > > Hi Shu,
> > >
> > > I had a quick look at the updated draft. A "source address table" in data-plane
> > can be useful in some cases.
> > >
> > > My basic question is why IPv4 is not in scope of this document, though the
> > Introduction section briefly mentions that it is due to the consideration of
> > implementation complexity. Is the dst-src-routing not recommended for IPv4?
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Nan
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: rtgwg <rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of 杨术
> > > Sent: Friday, March 1, 2024 1:32 AM
> > > To: rtgwg@ietf.org
> > > Subject: Fw: New Version Notification for
> > > draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-02.txt
> > >
> > > Hi RTGWG,
> > >
> > > We have updated the src/dst routing draft, your comments are welcomed!
> > >
> > > Best，
> > >
> > > Shu
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----原始邮件-----
> > > > 发件人: internet-drafts@ietf.org
> > > > 发送时间:2024-01-31 23:49:47 (星期三)
> > > > 收件人: "Anton Smirnov" <as@cisco.com>, "David Lamparter"
> > > > <david@opensourcerouting.org>, "Jen Linkova" <furry@google.com>,
> > > > "Mingwei Xu" <xumw@tsinghua.edu.cn>, "Shu Yang"
> > > > <yang.shu@szu.edu.cn>
> > > > 主题: New Version Notification for
> > > > draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-02.txt
> > > >
> > > > A new version of Internet-Draft
> > > > draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-02.txt has been successfully
> > > > submitted by Shu Yang and posted to the IETF repository.
> > > >
> > > > Name:     draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing
> > > > Revision: 02
> > > > Title:    Destination/Source Routing
> > > > Date:     2024-01-31
> > > > Group:    Individual Submission
> > > > Pages:    23
> > > > URL:
> > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-02.txt
> > > > Status:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing/
> > > > HTMLized:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing
> > > > Diff:
> > https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-02
> > > >
> > > > Abstract:
> > > >
> > > >    This note specifies using packets' source addresses in route lookups
> > > >    as additional qualifier to be used in hop-by-hop routing decisions.
> > > >    This applies to IPv6 [RFC2460] in general with specific
> > > >    considerations for routing protocol left for separate documents.
> > > >    There is nothing precluding similar operation in IPv4, but this is
> > > >    not in scope of this document.
> > > >
> > > >    Note that destination/source routing, source/destination routing,
> > > >    SADR, source-specific routing, source-sensitive routing, S/D routing
> > > >    and D/S routing are all used synonymously.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The IETF Secretariat
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > rtgwg mailing list
> > > rtgwg@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > rtgwg mailing list
> > > rtgwg@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg