Re: [spring] SRv6 packets carrying multiple instances of the SRH

Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> Tue, 26 November 2019 17:00 UTC

Return-Path: <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B4921210AD; Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:00:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 i4EzoltMjRkl; Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:00:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pl1-x62f.google.com (mail-pl1-x62f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62f]) (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 DEAFB1209B3; Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:00:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pl1-x62f.google.com with SMTP id t8so8343548plr.8; Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:00:06 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=1yU8rDapKZxgOFbFgmI1SmIQTJM1Mfz8KbzKKJCCtrg=; b=gSs+8go1rGkk+DQemTUrUG7r31cjUGGtjiB6x0ISGjPpEWgag8ibns0byCaNrBICoF SGL2Cqke/5bty1xYDBg6E1Ryux0X9Mb8d3MMTnps0QdIiyIHUJppD9pJrNCISHoUBF6v Ze+XCNEybUyba488ks40Ftn7lihVg4z+oaKnW8ZHEDw0SiNf+lwWym71ovvdOpINzVEs R1fZteh/LyFqMp0W5gS4Nv7MQhw9SfJy28c/mt1sgPU55J9AMuyHhuMRvZvbTE+2cNh8 9V8lK7zWrodIyn5aO7Y1xHLm6994dyLAv30o3BFDlAXhl2+1ZjmvFY7v3P/+q6UBaAyI aiOw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=1yU8rDapKZxgOFbFgmI1SmIQTJM1Mfz8KbzKKJCCtrg=; b=s5fIKsgIbDFuPCK0JP3BHaFYtSkdTEe51AmyiODL786PA6kYV67i63YHlYqrBqb1AH 4euaRnxMrmQzsTtQ/iV5TAqxbC4NxIH7fWTN50FbaZXbPUIWpYKAr5OtAtup0yF2yvAa qtwNfPaiKIjR6BryqtxIifshm7O7WmuExi5dZxfcJcM4+N9xBK6NCxf6f6G1aAQJON/h ROaXrk6vWGYGmJqRAnBk+8DmyXcbh5vooSLHQLpki4KOU4Zn17NDeySbSJYm/a2dU8ji 9yiZjadDrA/wjnW82K7CTIWALF9rmlpVC52ewSAvE5s4oGX9xIzu2Y7lgiwEyUaaUjuy nQjw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW2Kx6Axwt3SH1sg9GAlS+Hiq9CCftB8J3k+8PH9zpS66HVGYAU WMqYzl4yJ3SppbfPDoyZqkvxkUHT
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzGZ3/93W5MGDc+cZGHb17iOMi73HnGzDlLktk35zR/4jBEheCDJTL69iuV2algY+A7jspb4A==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:ff04:: with SMTP id ce4mr8210393pjb.133.1574787606159; Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:00:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:5a00:ef0b:7c6c:bf76:449e:624b? ([2601:647:5a00:ef0b:7c6c:bf76:449e:624b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 23sm4056655pjx.29.2019.11.26.09.00.04 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:00:05 -0800 (PST)
From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <A38FDC10-BCC7-49A4-96A0-BAF2EC435933@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_E4157F41-AC33-4DAC-B84C-ACB69DAA6B43"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 09:00:03 -0800
In-Reply-To: <BN7PR05MB569940AF9E6C94BC76086F6FAE4B0@BN7PR05MB5699.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, "Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril)" <pcamaril@cisco.com>, SPRING WG <spring@ietf.org>, 6man Chairs <6man-chairs@ietf.org>
To: Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>
References: <BN7PR05MB569940AF9E6C94BC76086F6FAE4B0@BN7PR05MB5699.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/7o6ylF1nd1Jw_UJI-M8DvKeYPqc>
Subject: Re: [spring] SRv6 packets carrying multiple instances of the SRH
X-BeenThere: spring@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Source Packet Routing in NetworkinG \(SPRING\)" <spring.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spring/>
List-Post: <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 17:00:09 -0000

My take on this is that it is fine to show text from RFC8200 without any change (with a reference), but it is not good to try to summarize that text (for example, as in “We assume….”).

Thanks,
Bob


> On Nov 23, 2019, at 4:28 PM, Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net> wrote:
> 
> Pablo,
> 
> During the SPRING WG meeting at IETF 106, we discussed the following text from Section 2 of draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-05:
> 
> “SRH: Segment Routing Header as defined in [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header].  We assume that the SRH may be present multiple times inside each packet.”
> 
> This text contradicts the following text from RFC 8200:
> 
> “Each extension header should occur at most once, except for the Destination Options header, which should occur at most twice (once before a Routing header and once before the upper-layer header).”
> 
> The following redaction reconciles the contradiction by remaining silent and allowing RFC 8200 to speak for itself:
> 
> OLD>
> SRH: Segment Routing Header as defined in [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header].  We assume that the SRH may be present multiple times inside each packet
> <OLD
> 
> NEW>
> SRH: Segment Routing Header as defined in [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header].
> <NEW
> 
> During the meeting, you mentioned the need to import some text from RFC 8200. If you feel the need to do that, the follow redaction imports all relevant text without bias:
> 
> OLD>
> SRH: Segment Routing Header as defined in [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header].  We assume that the SRH may be present multiple times inside each packet.
> <OLD
> 
> NEW>
> SRH: Segment Routing Header as defined in [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header].
> 
> As per Section 4.1 of RFC 8200, the Routing header (e.g., SRH)  should occur at most one inside a packet. However, IPv6 nodes must accept and attempt to process extension headers in any order and occurring any number of times in the same packet, except for the Hop-by-Hop Options header, which is restricted to appear immediately after an IPv6 header only.
> 
> Nonetheless, it is  strongly advised that sources of IPv6 packets adhere to the recommendations found in Section 4.1 of RFC 8200 until and unless subsequent specifications revise those recommendation.
> <NEW
> 
>                                                                                         Happy Holidays,
>                                                                                              Ron
> 
> 
> Juniper Business Use Only